Tex version of Ckafybarja Papers

["Mark E. Shoulson" <shoulson@CTR.COLUMBIA.EDU>]

>Date:         Wed, 23 Sep 1992 17:15:02 EDT
>From: Erik Rauch <erikr%MINERVA.CIS.YALE.EDU@CUVMB.CC.COLUMBIA.EDU>

>A small remark about the tex version of the Ckafybarja papers. Whenever
>I have seen lojban tex-ed or otherwise laser-printed, it's always been
>in courier or some other non-proportional font to make it stand out
>from the English text. I found this too much like the practice for
>program statements or computer output. Veijo has used a proportional but
>sans-serif font, which I think is the best solution. It stands out, but
>it doesn't look like a programming language.

As I think I mentioned before, I think Lojban looks very good in a
monospaced, typewriter-like font.  This is so particularly because the
apostrophes are less likely to get lost in reading, whereas that's more
likely in most proportional-spaced fonts.

"Too much like computer output"?  I've seen books I've absolutely detested
printed in Helvetica, but that doesn't mean I won't use Helvetica anymore.
Just because it happens to be used for purposes that aren't quite
convergent with the one we want doesn't mean that a given font should be
avoided like the plague.  It's also fairly common practice in some books to
give the computer text in roman font and the user input, or variable parts,
in italics.  Does that mean we should print exclusively in italics to avoid
associations with programming languages?  What have computer-textbook
printing conventions to do with how we should print our text, one way or
another?

~mark