Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #23203 > unrolled thread

Aptos is the new font

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  Aptos is the new font Retrograde  <fungus@amongus.com.invalid> - 2023-07-14 23:26 +0000
    Re: Aptos is the new font Visiblink <visiblink@mail.invalid> - 2023-07-14 18:46 -0700
      Re: Aptos is the new font Jan van den Broek <balglaas@dds.nl> - 2023-07-15 07:15 +0000
        Re: Aptos is the new font Visiblink <visiblink@mail.invalid> - 2023-07-15 08:34 -0700
    Re: Aptos is the new font Oregonian Haruspex <no_email@invalid.invalid> - 2023-07-16 14:16 +0000
    Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-24 20:03 +0300
      Re: Aptos is the new font John <john@building-m.simplistic-anti-spam-measure.net> - 2023-08-24 17:24 +0000
        Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-28 12:23 +0300
          Re: Aptos is the new font snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2023-08-28 13:01 +0100
            Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-28 19:10 +0300
              Re: Aptos is the new font snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2023-08-28 21:07 +0100
                Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-29 13:30 +0300
                  Re: Aptos is the new font snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2023-08-29 13:07 +0100
                    Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-29 18:06 +0300
                      Re: Aptos is the new font scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us - 2023-08-29 15:55 +0000
                        Re: Aptos is the new font Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-08-29 19:33 +0000
                          Re: Aptos is the new font scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us - 2023-08-30 04:40 +0000
                            Re: Aptos is the new font Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-08-30 07:07 +0000
                        Re: Aptos is the new font not@telling.you.invalid (Computer Nerd Kev) - 2023-08-30 08:28 +1000
                      Re: Aptos is the new font snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2023-08-29 16:58 +0100
                        Re: Aptos is the new font yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> - 2023-08-29 16:16 +0000
                          Re: Aptos is the new font snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2023-08-29 17:38 +0100
                          Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-08-31 01:08 +0300
                            Re: Aptos is the new font yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> - 2023-08-30 22:53 +0000
                        Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-08-31 00:36 +0300
                          Re: Aptos is the new font snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2023-08-30 22:50 +0100
                            Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-08-31 01:14 +0300
                  Re: Aptos is the new font Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2023-08-29 12:45 +0000
                    Re: Aptos is the new font snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2023-08-29 14:28 +0100
                      Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-08-31 01:02 +0300
                    Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> - 2023-08-29 18:18 +0300
                      Re: Aptos is the new font Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2023-08-29 16:14 +0000
                        Re: Aptos is the new font Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> - 2023-08-31 00:47 +0300
                      Re: Aptos is the new font John <john@building-m.simplistic-anti-spam-measure.net> - 2023-08-29 17:21 +0000
                Re: Aptos is the new font scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us - 2023-08-29 15:48 +0000
                  Re: Aptos is the new font snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2023-08-29 17:10 +0100
                Re: Aptos is the new font Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2023-08-29 17:45 +0100
                  Re: Aptos is the new font Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2023-08-29 17:46 +0100
                    Re: Aptos is the new font snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2023-08-29 17:53 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#23314

snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) writes:

> What about News Message-IDs and References?  If properly delimited,
> MacSOUP can automatically search its stored articles for a match on
> M-IDs.  

| group local.test
| 211 1 1 1 local.test
| post
| 340 Ok, recommended Message-ID <ucl...s$1@himalaya6...5id.onion>

Do message IDs ever appear without <...>?

Even digging back to RFC822 they seem to be always defined including
<...> so I wouldn't read that as optionally delimiting them and as
necessary part instead.

--
|rom The Future. +++ Breaking News From The Future. +++ Breaking News F|
|      The USoA are switching to the binary number system because      | 
|        having more than 1+1 distinct digits is far too woke.         |
|+ #MABA + #makeAmericaBinaryAgain + #USA + #USoA + #woke + #MABA + #ma|

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23315

yeti <yeti@tilde.institute> wrote:

> snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) writes:
> 
> > What about News Message-IDs and References?  If properly delimited,
> > MacSOUP can automatically search its stored articles for a match on
> > M-IDs.  
> 
> | group local.test
> | 211 1 1 1 local.test
> | post
> | 340 Ok, recommended Message-ID <ucl...s$1@himalaya6...5id.onion>
> 
> Do message IDs ever appear without <...>?
> 
> Even digging back to RFC822 they seem to be always defined including
> <...> so I wouldn't read that as optionally delimiting them and as
> necessary part instead.
> 

Fair comment.  



> --
> |rom The Future. +++ Breaking News From The Future. +++ Breaking News F|
> |      The USoA are switching to the binary number system because      |
> |        having more than 1+1 distinct digits is far too woke.         |
> |+ #MABA + #makeAmericaBinaryAgain + #USA + #USoA + #woke + #MABA + #ma|


-- 
^Ï^.       –  Sn!pe  –       <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

 My pet rock Gordon just is.    

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23330

yeti:

> --
> |rom The Future. +++ Breaking News From The Future. +++ Breaking News F|
> |      The USoA are switching to the binary number system because      |
> |        having more than 1+1 distinct digits is far too woke.         |
> |+ #MABA + #makeAmericaBinaryAgain + #USA + #USoA + #woke + #MABA + #ma|

Observe that your signature separator does not end with a
space, as it shall per paragraph 4.3 of RFC 2646.  Did
anybody complain about your signatures because they must be
viewed in a monospace font?

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23332

Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> writes:

> Observe that your signature separator does not end with a
> space, as it shall per paragraph 4.3 of RFC 2646.

That must have been an edit glitch.  The signature is auto inserted and
unless I ruin the --<space> line manually (this obviously may happen)
stays separated as planned.

> Did anybody complain about your signatures because they must be
> viewed in a monospace font?

No.

And you *may* view it in any strange font you want.

As only the formatting would screw up and the contents would not suffer
at all, I claim it is not worth spilling adrenaline over this.

...at least as long I don't split words or infinitives.  ;-P

Stay ommmmPtimistic!

-- 
|rom The Future. +++ Breaking News From The Future. +++ Breaking News F|
|      The USoA are switching to the binary number system because      | 
|        having more than 1+1 distinct digits is far too woke.         |
|+ #MABA + #makeAmericaBinaryAgain + #USA + #USoA + #woke + #MABA + #ma|

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23325

Sn!pe to Anton Shepelev:

> > Since Usenet predates web, clients need not be aware of
> > URLs to such a degree as to make them clickable
> > (presumably to open them in the default browser). I
> > don't think such newsreaders as tin, trn, or slrn
> > recognise URLs at all.
>
> What about News Message-IDs and References?  If properly
> delimited, MacSOUP can automatically search its stored
> articles for a match on M-IDs.

Message-ID: is a system header, not part of the article
body.  All remotely sane clients format that header
corretly.  The requirements for it are much stricter than
for the formatting of URLs inside articles.

> MacSOUP displays your "beautifully formatted" text as you
> have sent it.  It also quotes your text according to
> custom and usage.  That quotation process makes your
> "beautiful" text look like a dogs dinner.

Just a small note here: my right-justrified text was quite
narrow -- 52 charactes per line -- which makes it quotable
over quite a few levels of nesting without any reflowing
whatsoever, but your client seems always to reflow.

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23328

Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@gmail.moc> wrote:

[...]

> > MacSOUP displays your "beautifully formatted" text as you
> > have sent it.  It also quotes your text according to
> > custom and usage.  That quotation process makes your
> > "beautiful" text look like a dogs dinner.
> 
> Just a small note here: my right-justrified text was quite
> narrow -- 52 charactes per line -- which makes it quotable
> over quite a few levels of nesting without any reflowing
> whatsoever, but your client seems always to reflow.
>  
  
MacSOUP reflows when I command it to do so.  
  
As I said in an adjacent post:-  
I've finished with this topic if you have?  
  
-- 
^Ï^.       –  Sn!pe  –       <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

 My pet rock Gordon just is.    

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23331

Sn!pe:

> As I said in an adjacent post:-
> I've finished with this topic if you have?

OK, I will not bother you about it anymore.

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23305

Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:
> Sn!pe:
>> Anton Shepelev:
>> > Sn!pe:
>> > > Anton Shepelev:
>> > >
>> > > > But my beautiful justification is intentional.
>> > >
>> > > Beautiful justification?It isn't beautiful on ~my~ Usenet.
>> >
>> > You Usenset reader?  MacSOUP?  I conjecture it is not, by default, 
>> > displaying posts in a monospace font, which it sould.  
>> > Hard-wrapped plain-text -- whether justified or not -- is medium 
>> > for character-cell devices.
>>
>> I disagree.
> 
> I defend my point with the two arguments:
> 
> 1. Hard-wrapping splits lines based on their length in
>    characters, whereas with a proportional font line length
>    cannot be measured by character count.

I suspect that Sn!pe's complaint is not the hard-wrap (my own reply 
here is also hard wrapped), but instead is about the even right 
justification by additional full space insertion plus the 
auto-hyphenation.  Those two, in a mono-space context, make for 
severely ugly wordwrap.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23306

Rich <rich@example.invalid> wrote:

> Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:
> > Sn!pe:
> >> Anton Shepelev:
> >> > Sn!pe:
> >> > > Anton Shepelev:
> >> > >
> >> > > > But my beautiful justification is intentional.
> >> > >
> >> > > Beautiful justification?It isn't beautiful on ~my~ Usenet.
> >> >
> >> > You Usenset reader?  MacSOUP?  I conjecture it is not, by default,
> >> > displaying posts in a monospace font, which it sould.  
> >> > Hard-wrapped plain-text -- whether justified or not -- is medium
> >> > for character-cell devices.
> >> >  
> >>  
> >> I disagree.
> >>  
> >   
> > I defend my point with the two arguments:
> > 
> > 1. Hard-wrapping splits lines based on their length in
> >    characters, whereas with a proportional font line length
> >    cannot be measured by character count.
> >  
>  
> I suspect that Sn!pe's complaint is not the hard-wrap (my own reply 
> here is also hard wrapped), but instead is about the even right 
> justification by additional full space insertion plus the 
> auto-hyphenation.  Those two, in a mono-space context, make for 
> severely ugly wordwrap.
>  
  
I think we agree, Rich.  If one cares enough about formatting to try 
to achieve block (brick) text when monospaced, the classical way is 
to use synonyms and word order, not the facile method of inserting
extraneous spaces and hyphens.  That merely looks ridiculous when
applied to Usenet News, particularly if quoted or read using a
proportional font.  
  
Perhaps Anton is more concerned about how his words look on his own
screen rather than how they appear to his readers.  
    
-- 
^Ï^.       –  Sn!pe  –       <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

 My pet rock Gordon just is.    

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23329

Sn!pe:

> I think we agree, Rich.  If one cares enough about
> formatting to try to achieve block (brick) text when
> monospaced, the classical way is to use synonyms and word
> order, not the facile method of inserting extraneous
> spaces and hyphens.

This is like verse: one does not correspond in it on a daily
basis.  These are not the times of Lucretius.

> That merely looks ridiculous when applied to Usenet News,
> particularly if quoted or read using a proportional font.

I agree that it is horrible when viewed in a proportional
font, but then a proportional font makes no sense for hard-
wrapped text...  Leave it for high typography: troff, LaTeX,
&c.

> Perhaps Anton is more concerned about how his words look
> on his own screen rather than how they appear to his
> readers.

A good newsreader will take care to display posts as the
author saw them while composing. Proportional fonts of
course ruin everything, not only justification, but all the
graphical formatting and structuring on the rectangular grid
of a character-cell device. I once receviced a beautiful
ASCII scematic in response to a post about the topology of
an ultra-linear tube amplifier. The assumption of a
monospaced font greatly enhances the text medium.

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23308

Rich:

> I suspect that Sn!pe's complaint is not the hard-wrap (my
> own reply here is also hard wrapped), but instead is about
> the even right justification by additional full space
> insertion plus the auto-hyphenation.  Those two, in a
> mono-space context, make for severely ugly wordwrap.

Did you mean /non/-monospace context, wherein this format is
indeed horrible?

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23313

Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> wrote:
> Rich:
> 
>> I suspect that Sn!pe's complaint is not the hard-wrap (my own reply 
>> here is also hard wrapped), but instead is about the even right 
>> justification by additional full space insertion plus the 
>> auto-hyphenation.  Those two, in a mono-space context, make for 
>> severely ugly wordwrap.
> 
> Did you mean /non/-monospace context, wherein this format is indeed 
> horrible?

No, I meant exactly what I wrote.  A mono-space context, as in a fixed 
width font, which is how I read Usenet (tin, running in a urxvt, using 
a fixed width font).

Your initial post, that started this discussion, appeared like this 
(small quote, not the entire part, with "> " prefixed to demarcate it 
as a "quote"):

> The very fact that default settings have so  tremen-
> dous an impact shows how lazy and careless they are.
> In any program I use intensively,  including  e-mail
> and  Usenet  clients,  text  editors, IDEs, document
> processors, and word processors,  most  of  the  de-
> faults  are  redefined to what suits my needs and my
> easthetics. The defaults are a  minor  nuance,  only
> annoying  when  a  feature is "on" by default rather
> then "off", throwing in your face tons of  function-

It has both auto-hyphenation, and insertion of extra full spaces (the 
double spaces between some words) in order to make for an even right 
margin.

This is common for variable width fonts, and esp. so for paper 
publishing, but for those contexts, the even right margin edge is 
created by inserting small amounts of space within the line to even up 
the right edge, not full space characters between words.  So in a paper 
publishing context, it often does look superior because the extra 
inserted space is subtle enough to not be noticable.

Performing auto-hyphenation and space stuffing to make an even right 
edge with a fixed width font and a character cell terminal produces a 
very ugly output.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23327

Rich:

> Performing auto-hyphenation and space stuffing to make an
> even right edge with a fixed width font and a character
> cell terminal produces a very ugly output.

Hmmm, but manpages have been rendered this way for forty
years, e.g.:

   <http://www.tin.org/bin/man.cgi?section=5&topic=tin>

And the Pascal newsletter switched form left-justified text
to right justified, rather than backwards:

    #1: <https://www.standardpascal.org/pug_newsletter_01.pdf>
   #27: <https://www.standardpascal.org/pug_newsletter_27.pdf>

Considering how technologically harder it is to hyphenate
and right-adjust text than to left-align without
hyphenation, the publishers and designers cerainly thought
the aesthetical improvement worth the work. I think that the
standard plain-text format with left justificatio and no
hyphenation became popular because it is the simplest
possible format supported in all text editors. And we know
that classic newsreader follow the Unix ideology in doing
their own job, delegating article composition to external
text editors...

-- 
()  ascii ribbon campaign -- against html e-mail
/\  www.asciiribbon.org   -- against proprietary attachments

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23319

Anton Shepelev <anton.txt@g{oogle}mail.com> writes:

> Rich:
>
>> I suspect that Sn!pe's complaint is not the hard-wrap (my
>> own reply here is also hard wrapped), but instead is about
>> the even right justification by additional full space
>> insertion plus the auto-hyphenation.  Those two, in a
>> mono-space context, make for severely ugly wordwrap.
>
> Did you mean /non/-monospace context, wherein this format is
> indeed horrible?

Well, your messages would look particularly bad in a variable-width
font, because your client is doing justification assuming a mono font,
but frankly it looks bad in a mono font too.

The first paper you posted the other day looked pretty good, but one
thing I noticed is that it had *no* hyphenation -- and your messages do,
a lot. Hyphenation is awkward to read. Frankly, given how wide spaces
are in a mono font, and how ugly hyphenation is, I think ragged right
edges look much better than oddly-spaced and over-hyphenated
justification.

john

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23309

Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
> Consider the case of Thunderbird, which has the bad habit of omitting 
> a space between the quote chevrons and the quoted text.  If the text
> quoted is an undelimited URL, it will be broken (non-clickable)  
> 
> Examples below:-  
> 
> http://www.example.url.com       <~~[original]
> 
> becomes (when quoted by Thunderbird):-  
> 
>>http://www.example.url.com        <~~[broken]
> 
> If it were delimited it becomes, when quoted:- 
> 
>><http://www.example.url.com>       <~~[works] 

Who died and made you net.cop?  In any case, if your newsreader can't handle
a URL within plain text, perhaps you should get a better newsreader.  tin
(to name just one example) has no problem with either of the URLs given
above (or below, in my sig).

Bear in mind that Usenet predates the Web by several years.  I've been
posting here since 1989, and it had already been around for a few years
before that.

-- 
  _/_
 / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( https://alfter.us/         Top-posting!
 \_^_/                            >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23312

<scott@alfter.diespammersdie.us> wrote:

> Sn!pe <snipeco.2@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Consider the case of Thunderbird, which has the bad habit of omitting
> > a space between the quote chevrons and the quoted text.  If the text
> > quoted is an undelimited URL, it will be broken (non-clickable)  
> > 
> > Examples below:-  
> > 
> > http://www.example.url.com       <~~[original]
> > 
> > becomes (when quoted by Thunderbird):-  
> > 
> >>http://www.example.url.com        <~~[broken]
> > 
> > If it were delimited it becomes, when quoted:- 
> > 
> >><http://www.example.url.com>       <~~[works] 
> >   
>  
> Who died and made you net.cop?  In any case, if your newsreader can't handle
> a URL within plain text, perhaps you should get a better newsreader.  tin
> (to name just one example) has no problem with either of the URLs given
> above (or below, in my sig).
> 
> Bear in mind that Usenet predates the Web by several years.  I've been
> posting here since 1989, and it had already been around for a few years
> before that.
>  
  
Well you've beaten me, Scott, I've only been on Usenet since it became
commercially available here in the UK in 1994.  Congratulations!  
I won't count my years on Compu$erve before they were borged by AOL.  

-- 
^Ï^.       –  Sn!pe  –       <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

 My pet rock Gordon just is.    

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23316

Sn!pe wrote:

> Examples below:-
> 
> http://www.example.url.com       <~~[original]

That's me quoting your non-delimited URL in thunderbird

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23317

Andy Burns wrote:

> Sn!pe wrote:
> 
>> Examples below:-
>>
>> http://www.example.url.com       <~~[original]
> 
> That's me quoting your non-delimited URL in thunderbird

Still looks good to me (though personally I would delimit it)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23318

Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

> Andy Burns wrote:
> 
> > Sn!pe wrote:
> > 
> >> Examples below:-
> >>
> >> http://www.example.url.com       <~~[original]
> > 
> > That's me quoting your non-delimited URL in thunderbird
> 
> Still looks good to me (though personally I would delimit it)
>  
  
I can't explain that, I'll do some research... 

... Bother!  

I've been maligning TB, it's ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272 
that's doing it.  Apologies.  
  
-- 
^Ï^.       –  Sn!pe  –       <https://youtu.be/_kqytf31a8E>

 My pet rock Gordon just is.    

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web