An overabundance of type styles

[geoff-h -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA]

 Beth Agnew described a manual with far too many type
 styles, and noted that <<All of these various uses of font
 and typeface are laboriously described in their
 "Conventions Used in this Manual" section.>>

 Quite simply, if you have to describe how you're using
 typography, then you've created an ineffective design: I
 seriously doubt that anyone except a techwhirler reads
 these things, and anyone who does will not likely remember
 them. And speaking as an editor... what a nightmare to have
 to proofread the document for consistency.

 In my opinion, typography should support a good design, not
 substitute for one. Along those lines, I'm not aware that
 there's any practical limit to the number of typefaces and
 styles that you can use in a well-designed document (e.g.,
 see Adobe's typeface catalog for an obvious, albeit
 extreme, example), but I strongly suspect that this number
 increases in direct proportion to how well the design has
 been done. Someone who's actually researched this in some
 depth (attention Karen Schriver! <grin>) can probably
 provide some more concrete information, but the bottom line
 remains: nobody should ever have to read a user's guide to
 your user's guide.

 --Geoff Hart     @8^{)}     geoff-h -at- mtl -dot- feric -dot- ca
 Disclaimer: Speaking for myself, not FERIC.

	http://www.documentation.com/, or http://www.dejanews.com/