Re: Most readable line lengths?

[Scott McClare <smcclare -at- DY4 -dot- COM>]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geoff Hart (by way of "Eric J. Ray" <ght -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA>)
> [SMTP:ght -at- MTL -dot- FERIC -dot- CA]
> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 1999 10:13 AM
> To:   TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU
> Subject:      Most readable line lengths?
>
> Sarah Wigser has been <<tasked with researching "the most readable
> line lengths for 11 point type". This is kind of out of the ball park
> for me - any pointers?>>
>
> First pointer: Ignore any recommendations that involve inches or
> centimetres. Fonts vary enormously in their actual physical size for
> a given point size (e.g., Times 10 is much larger than Garamond 10),
> so measured line lengths are a bad metric.
>
> Second pointer: The rule of thumb for line lengths is usually that
> a line should be between two and three "alphabets" long; 2.5 times
> works well for me in most cases. That is, type a...z twice,
> measure the length, then add 50%. This works surprisingly well as a
> starting point, which leads to pointer number 3:
>
[snip for brevity]

This is fascinating.  I take it, then, that "most readable line length" is
somewhat proportional to the size of the print, regardless of the absolute
line length (within reason, of course)?

For example, there's about a two-inch difference in the length of 2.5
alphabets, in 12-point and 16-point Times Roman.

Take care,

Scott

--
Scott McClare - Technical Writer
DY 4 Systems Inc., Kanata, Ontario, Canada
(613) 599-9199 x502 smcclare -at- dy4 -dot- com
Opinions are my own


 From ??? -at- ??? Sun Jan 00 00:00:00 0000=