View Single Post
Old 07-26-2011, 06:48 AM   #58
charleski
Wizard
charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.charleski ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 1,188
Karma: 727236
Join Date: Sep 2009
Device: PRS-505
Quote:
Originally Posted by karunaji View Post
E-readers require change of typesetting philosophy. There is no use to trying duplicate every feature of print typography. Font embedding could be a nice feature but it is optional because the power of an ereader is to choose the fonts of your liking. A publisher no longer can force such things on readers and they have to invent a different approach to provide the best reading experience. For example, I would like to see a possibility to provide automatic footnotes. It should not be too difficult to provide a footer or a running head whenever the text requires it.
Nonsense.

Modern electronic devices are perfectly capable of reproducing all the typographical nuances of print. Even in a reflowable setting in which the base font and screen sizes are undetermined it's possible to reproduce the vast majority of elements found in print. The only reason the .mobi format is so limited is because Amazon has failed to develop it. It's perfectly within their power to expand the spec to allow a richer set of parameters.

There is no need to change basic typographic practice, which has been honed over the course of hundreds of years. The technology needs to catch up and become more capable rather than dictating a new set of limitations. Print has its limitations as well, and where electronic systems allow new practices that transcend those, then that's a good thing, but this mustn't be used to impose a new straight-jacket on the design of books.

People make a big deal about being able to change the fonts. If the person who designed the book doesn't care what font you use, then fine, change it to suit your taste. I certainly would have difficulty reading everything in Caecilia. But if the designer carefully picked a specific font in order to lend a specific character to the work, then you're corrupting the experience by using something else. It should still be possible, if only because ereaders have a responsibility to accommodate those with impaired vision, but it should be clear that you're experiencing a modified version.

Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT View Post
Do they? I don't see any evidence of that. Can you give an example?
The UK books from Bloomsbury are all set in Garamond, but the US publisher commissioned a new font for the titlepage and headings, and uses Felt Tip Roman for Hagrid's handwritten notes.
charleski is offline   Reply With Quote