Groups | Search | Server Info | Login | Register

Groups > comp.sys.apple2 > #47057

Re: Better way to describe 80-column text

Show all headers | View raw

Personally, I have used actual point sizes as they appear on the screen.

One can break this discussion into two components:

Point size.  Print out, or use a reference document and compare actual text size.  Say 10pt on the ref document compared to the displayed text being larger or smaller.

The other component is DPI, dots per inch as was calculated above.

For a given display, there will be a floor where the DPI is not sufficient to render the font glyphs with enough fidelity to be useful.  An Apple 2 has basically two DPI numbers.  One for the 40 column text and HGR, and a sort of higher one for 80 columns and DHGR.  Both are the same vertically.

On the other extreme, a mobile will have a much higher DPI, and can display much smaller glyphs.

Simply give them a reference text size on a printed document and or maybe a couple, just enough to compare the intended cases and no more.

They can literally hold that up to a display and adjust the font parameters on it, until it is good to go.

Display size makes this all hard, and I tend to just get physical references and or point to ones I know most people can find and make adjustments from there.

You can do this with a nice sans serif font, monospace type, and print out font at 10, 12, 14, 16pt and pick out your Apple 2 text size you like and convert it to a physical point size and be good to go talking about it to others.

About the only way it goes bad is when the desired physical size is too small for the DPI of a device.  In that scenario, either get the display farther away,  lolol, or use a larger reference size to account for that display and DPI.  Given you want to specify text size on newer stuff than an Apple 2, you should not run into this problem and need only to associate Apple 2 40, 80 column text to an physical point size and monospaced sans serif font and be good.

Back to comp.sys.apple2 | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Better way to describe 80-column text Slick RCBD <slickrcbdnews@gmail.com> - 2022-01-21 13:53 -0800
  Re: Better way to describe 80-column text I am Rob <gids.rs@sasktel.net> - 2022-01-21 18:04 -0800
  Re: Better way to describe 80-column text Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2022-01-22 15:15 +1300
  Re: Better way to describe 80-column text "Michael 'AppleWin Debugger Dev'" <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2022-01-22 08:03 -0800
  Re: Better way to describe 80-column text fadden <thefadden@gmail.com> - 2022-01-22 09:13 -0800
    Re: Better way to describe 80-column text Slick RCBD <slickrcbdnews@gmail.com> - 2022-01-24 06:45 -0800
      Re: Better way to describe 80-column text "Michael 'AppleWin Debugger Dev'" <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2022-01-25 08:23 -0800
        Re: Better way to describe 80-column text Doug Dingus <doug.dingus@gmail.com> - 2022-03-14 10:54 -0700
          Re: Better way to describe 80-column text "Michael 'AppleWin Debugger Dev'" <michael.pohoreski@gmail.com> - 2022-03-15 10:06 -0700

csiph-web