Re:What is wrong with Comic Sans?
by loup-vaillant on Sunday September 07, 2014 @09:11AM
(#8281011)
Depends how you use it. When someone uses a font like Comic Sans sparingly, you can infer there's something special about this text. That maybe, this particular snippet is either a joke, or an informal formulation, or an XKCD quote. It can indeed be the author signalling that this snippet should not be taken very seriously.
But if the font is used by default, you cannot reasonably infer credibility from it. If the whole thing feels less credible or less serious anyway, then it's a status issue.
It's like someone showing up to give a talk with a Hitler hairstyle and toothbrush moustache. There's nothing wrong with the hair or the moustache per se, and perhaps they are your favourite for some reason, but the pre-associations will be distracting to people.
And now I'll Godwin myself out.
Re:What is wrong with Comic Sans?
by seanmcdirmid on Sunday September 07, 2014 @08:30AM
(#8280943)
Serif fonts aren't more credible than San serif fonts. Serif fonts are great for lots of paragraph based text, san serif fonts are better for titles and shorter passages...and also code.
Fun fonts can be serif or sans, and are generally more artistic and ad oriented.
On screens you are right.
But on paper, with much higher resolution, serif looks more serious.
Re:What is wrong with Comic Sans?
by seanmcdirmid on Sunday September 07, 2014 @05:57PM
(#8282566)
Sans often appears on signage, especially in Europe, where it works very well.
This isn't a bad thing -- the pre-association people have for different classes of fonts make it easier to convey messages in branding and marketing. It makes us distinguish between stories in newspapers and magazines (which we should remember) from frivolity that we could easily forget. With fonts, the medium is a significant part of the message.