Blog Font
It was inevitable that some designer would eventually name a new font "Blog," and that has indeed come to pass.
As the illustration above shows, the font isn't as ugly as its name, but it's also not breathtaking in its originality or its ability to evoke blogginess. I will admit that I have no idea what qualities should be imposed on a font design to make it, well, bloggy, but then, I'm not a designer. But when I look at this, "blog" does not pop into my mind.
And as long as we're on the subject of blog-evoking (blogvocative?) characterizations, I'm still waiting for someone to design a universal symbol for "blog."
How many seraphs can type on the head of a pin?
Actually, there's ongoing debate over the legibility and readability of serif vs sans-serif fonts. Most of what I've read indicates that serifs are verboten at smaller font sizes, but actually improve readability at larger ones. The theory is that the serifs "lead" the eye from character to character.
Personally, I think it's quite subjective. Most of my clients prefer their sites to use sans serif fonts, but not all. Georgia is a very legible and readable serifed font, designed for screen display (and it uses wonderful oldstyle numbers, with the descenders on some falling below the baseline).
Calibri isn't used by bloggers because not everyone has it installed on their computers, including me. If the visitor doesn't have it, the browser will substitute something else, and depending on whether you've created a proper style sheet or not, that something else might be pretty icky (a technical design term).
As to your proposed blogo, which hemisphere would be used? (I give this a better than 50/50 chance of causing a major war.)
Posted by: Eric at July 16, 2007 05:25 PMI thought that "blog font" was "verdana, arial, helvetica, sans-serif"
... but I guess that's kind of a lot to write out...
The orange RSS logo has almost become synonymous with "blog."
Posted by: Rob O. at July 16, 2007 07:30 PMBrian, what do you have against "'times new roman', bookman, georgia, serif"? Are or you joining Larry's Anti-Serif Society?
Rob, that's true, although you can slap an RSS feed on just about any old website. We need something that's exclusive to our turf.
Posted by: Eric at July 16, 2007 09:33 PMI'm with Larry, when it comes to blog text. Paper's a different story. Same with headlines on-screen. But paragraphs of small type on screen? I vote crisp over fancy.
:-)
Posted by: Brian at July 17, 2007 05:57 AMI agree. There's no place for 10px Times Roman on the web. Well, for that matter, there's no place for 10px anything, despite what my style sheet may be showing you right now. ;-)
Posted by: Eric at July 17, 2007 08:47 AM
I did see a symbol for "No more Times Roman on the web" once. It was a black seriphed A with the ubiquitous red circled diagonal line.
Seriphed fonts do not read well on CRT and LCD displays apparently. Why someone would use a seriphed font to represent blogdom is puzzling. What's wrong with Calibri, blogsters?
Keep the web safe from seriphed fonts, people. I know some will lament, "When seriphs are outlawed only outlaw bloggers will have seriphs," but I prefer my fonts sans-seriph. It's a modern age, and seriphs are an artifact held over from the age of quill and inkwell.
Let's propose a world globe (hemisphere) with a non-seriphed B super-imposed over it for the blōgō.
And add a new word to the lexicon.
Larry S.
Posted by: Larry S at July 16, 2007 05:04 PM