- cross-posted to:
- typography@lemmy.ca
- cross-posted to:
- typography@lemmy.ca
Note that there still have been no studies on its efficacy. At worst, it is a great font to avoid ambiguity between characters.
Note that there still have been no studies on its efficacy. At worst, it is a great font to avoid ambiguity between characters.
You’re looking at it, the one linked In the op lmao
The Hyperlegible web site makes no mention of dyslexia, only visual impairment. Those are two totally different issues.
Well yes but beauty standards for typography run counter to accommodating for dyslexia, especially for sans serifs. Similarity in shapes, curves, weights, and stroke width are seen as beautiful, but they’re exactly what must be given up for more accessible typography.
Someone else in the comments here did mention Bionic Reading though, and there’s a free alternative in Fast Font, which has a gradient of weights for each word from black for the first letter to thin for the last one. Might be something to consider
I like how that font disambiguates glyphs that often get confused, but I found it to be pretty hard to look at, honestly. I think the main issue might be that the line thickness appears to be uniform at all parts in all letters.
See my reply to the other person for a couple of fonts to try :)