So I wonder if when the jobs creation figures finally get released in ‘two weeks’ they will be reported using Roman numerals?
Ibookmarked the article for later - looks interesting. But one thing that sorta turned me off at first glance was that they did not portray identical sized fonts. Assume/hope that is mentioned in the article.
For this admin, I suggest most of their policy would be best issued in wingdings.
Certainly not Woke Arabic Numerals.
What I don’t understand is Rubio describing Calibri as ‘wasteful’. How can a font be ‘wasteful’? If anything, Times New Roman has got to be more wasteful than Calibri, assuming documents are being printed out. It’s got to take more ink to print all those little serifs. I mean, I can’t remember the last time I actually printed out anything, but I bet the government is still awash in a sea of paper.
Times New Roman is more compact when printed than is Calibri.
I usually use Calibri for my first drafts of briefs. However, if I’m bumping up against a page limit for filing, I sometimes convert the draft to Times New Roman and that generally reduces the amount of page space needed, to get me under the page limit.
Actually Times New Roman is a more condensed font so less paper in theory would be used. I can’t comment on the toner usage.
I thought Times New Roman was designed to be more legible in crappy newsprint, compared to Modern Roman?
Ah. As a former graphic artist and, at one time enough of an expert that I could ID dozens of fonts on sight, I guess I should have known that. But I’ve been mostly out of the font game for awhile now.
Shrug their shoulders and look at him with wide eyes and their mouth agape.
But he’s too stupid to know that he’s stupid. So I suspect it’s an ‘I want all the attention’ or ‘I hate the disabled’ thing. Probably both.
I should try to look them up, and don’t know if they are still in effect, but the 7th Circuit Ct of Appeals used to have EXTREMELY detailed style rules, mandating type font/size/formatting in pleadings. To some extent, such rules are needed as some attys try to get around page limitations by placing excessive material in footnotes, messing with margins and spacing, etc.
As I understood, the rules were largely promulgated by J Easterbrook - truly an asshole on the bench.
I think it’s basically just reflexive culture wars stuff at this point – policies and rhetoric aimed at protecting a whole laundry list of vulnerable groups have become something that Democrats “own,” and therefore, that the Trump administration must oppose at all costs, regardless of how trivial the policy or how silly the justification. (And, in fairness, “think of XXX vulnerable group” sometimes is the Democratic equivalent of “think of the children,” and, in this case, it’s unclear whether the policy in question actually helped disabled people or whether it was basically bureaucracy theater.)
Many courts have extremely rigid rules about font. I was once ordered to “show cause” in federal court why I shouldn’t be sanctioned for not using 14 point font. I had to go to a printer and get an affidavit that microsoft word “14” was not technically 14 point. I argued the rules were a bit ambiguous, and I was sorry). The judge let me off, with a warning.
While Word uses the standard 1/72 inch ratio, professional printing uses a slightly different, more precise definition (1/72.27 inch), meaning Word points aren’t perfectly identical to traditional print points over large measurements
Taking Times New Roman out of this for a moment, what’s the deal with your regarding Calibri as being “inferior to…Arial in every other way”?
I just typed “the quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog” in both fonts in lower case, then did the same in upper case. They look almost identical, with the exception of the lowercase ‘g’ which in Calibri looks like the old-fashioned typewriter ‘g’ that looks like a pair of eyeglasses turned on its side. I have a hard time seeing why anyone would have an issue of one v. the other.
I just did this. In lower case at font size 14 as an example, Arial Narrow looks crisper and takes up maybe 90% of the space.
Uppercase means nothing, so I did capitalize every word and Calibri still looks like blurry crap to my eye.
Calibri is an ugly font. Also I do a lot of map making in Paint and Calibri at small font sizes is really terrible. Probably the very factor that makes it look better to Microsoft on screen or something.
And as all of this is in the eye of the beholder, Microsoft should never have made it a default that is very hard to change. Thus resentment.
I’ve never felt the need to express my individuality through the formatting of my pleadings. My sole preference has long been that there be one universal standard for such things, such that I need not rejigger things for different venues.
And I have rarely encountered a page limit that was meaningful to me. In even the most complex cases, I’ve nearly always felt than my determinative points could be expressed in far fewer pages. I’ve encountered many attys who regularly request leave to file overlong pleadings. Perhaps coincidentally, those assholes seem most likely to bill/submit requests for excessive fees to reflect their considerable efforts…. 
As I recall, Easterbrook/the 7th Cir also prescribed courtroom attire including, for men, a suit jacket “buttoned up the front.” I don’t know if that meant attys were supposed to button their suits when standing - something I have long considered a silly affectation. Or perhaps he was referring to men’s suits buttoned up the back - which might be favored by U of C geniuses.
Maybe so, but apparently more difficult for people with visual disabilities to read than a non-serif font, especially on digital devices.
OK, but I was talking about what you said about Arial proper. If you misspoke and your intended comparison was between Calibri and Arial Narrow, that’s a whole 'nother thing.
My point is strictly that, other than the lowercase ‘g’, I find Calibri and Arial proper to be essentially identical, and really wouldn’t grok why someone would have a strong preference for one over the other. If you don’t, that’s fine.
I think I specifically mentioned Arial Narrow, but I’ll check. But I do find Arial > Calibri also. You know, eye of the beholder.
As I thought, you missed that part I guess in my first post in this thread.
I saw it but that you preferred Arial Narrow to both Arial and Calibri was irrelevant to my question. It did not repudiate or qualify anything you said about Calibri being inferior to Arial.
I generally don’t like sans serif fonts, still write all my reports at work in Times New Roman 12 pt (unless explicitly directed otherwise), and think that claiming that ClearType still needs to be a consideration when even cheap smartphones are at least 720p is silly. If the State Department had been ordered to change with no reason given nobody currently would care except the people who might complain that it’s more of a pain in the ass to set up a Word template and make it stick than it should be.