Note that there still have been no studies on its efficacy. At worst, it is a great font to avoid ambiguity between characters.

  • tisktiskEnglish
    4•2 months ago

    This seems to indicate it’s best for those with ‘low vision’ which almost implies there’s a more ‘hyperlegible’ font that’s better for those with standard/regular vision. Is this the case or should it be argued that this font is most legible for all and thusly also best for those with low vision? Just curious–would like to know what best runner-ups would be suggested too

    • tisktiskEnglish
      6•2 months ago

      I’m also curious how they went about creating this font. Any resources on how they go about proving/creating it’s ‘hyperlegibility’?

      • @stelelor@lemmy.ca
        6•2 months ago

        The website lists some features that enhance legibility. Some are common sense (ex. 1, l and I all look different), some are less obvious:

        • Unambiguous Letterforms

        • Clear Uprights

        • Distinct Pairs

        • Open Counters

        • Spurs and Tails

        • Special Circles (although this one could be just branding)