Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!us.feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!diablo1.news.osn.de!news.osn.de!diablo2.news.osn.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: "Oeter Johns" <oj19854@nospam.com>
Newsgroups: comp.misc,alt.sys.pdp11,alt.folklore.computers
Subject: Re: Revamped PDP-11 in Brooklyn
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 07:32:07 +1000
Lines: 30
Message-ID: <c03tblFqqsoU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <bu3ndcF8gbeU6@mid.individual.net> <op.xf77w8i1o4et73@dell3100> <210520142219043033%timstreater@greenbee.net> <alpine.LNX.2.02.1405212301370.6003@darkstar.example.org> <220520141922019725%timstreater@greenbee.net> <985.290T421T10824102@kltpzyxm.invalid> <llma8i$das$1@speranza.aioe.org> <llnmdv$t7q$1@dont-email.me> <llo5si$t11$1@speranza.aioe.org> <lloajs$mop$1@dont-email.me> <c03dnaFnhujU1@mid.individual.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="utf-8"; reply-type=response
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: individual.net xWRjpjyU98TNnftNtQk7Mg4HGt054F8A33Mb2szuQxdM2d7/Y=
Cancel-Lock: sha1:KhVZDVCl+cV3eRK55nhfdjVO68g=
In-Reply-To: <c03dnaFnhujU1@mid.individual.net>
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Importance: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 14.0.8117.416
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V14.0.8117.416
Xref: csiph.com comp.misc:3668



"polygonum" <rmoudndgers@vrod.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:c03dnaFnhujU1@mid.individual.net...
> On 23/05/2014 21:21, Stephen Sprunk wrote:
>> Likewise, you often see "ug" or "um" because some apparently find it too
>> difficult to write "μg" or "μm".  The medical field uses "mcg", which is
>> even worse than "ug".
>
> I think it is not difficulty of writing but two other factors. Difficulty 
> of inputting and using mu on computers and typewriters, and doing so 
> reliably. And the second is the difficulty of those not at all involved in 
> medical or scientific matters, such as patients, in appreciating the 
> distinction between mu and u.
>
> Also, medical units very often use capital L for litre due to the ease of 
> confusion between the usual culprits. By the way, does anyone know how or 
> why any competent font designer would ever produce a font in which 
> confusion hasn't been very largely designed out?

Because they just don’t understand the problem.

It's less clear why we haven't got fonts specifically
designed to be used in that situation.

(I'll allow that
> some fancy fonts might not be so wonderful - I am really thinking of the 
> workaday fonts in which clarity is vital.)