Re: The case for lower case

Randall Hyde wrote:
> It is amazing how a backwards typographical convention from the early days
> of computing still persists today. All uppercase is hard to read. Period.
> Indeed, that's the point -- to slow people down and make them pay more
> attention (just like boldface type, for example).

IMHO, both pure lower and upper case tend to slow down
the reading speed. That's why we have two cases in English
language.

> Lower case letters contain more visual "information" than upper case
> characters. As a simple experiment, try the following: take a *** of paper
> and cover up the top (or bottom) half of a row of all upper case characters.
> Look at how hard it is to read. Now repeat the experiement with all
> lowercase characters. You'll actually be able to make out the words in most
> of the sentence. Actually, you don't even have to go that far. Just reread
> this paragraph in all upper case and see how easy it is to read:
>
> LOWER CASE LETTERS CONTAIN MORE VISUAL "INFORMATION" THAN UPPER CASE
> CHARACTERS. AS A SIMPLE EXPERIMENT, TRY THE FOLLOWING: TAKE A *** OF PAPER
> AND COVER UP THE TOP (OR BOTTOM) HALF OF A ROW OF ALL UPPER CASE CHARACTERS.
> LOOK AT HOW HARD IT IS TO READ. NOW REPEAT THE EXPERIEMENT WITH ALL
> LOWERCASE CHARACTERS. YOU'LL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO MAKE OUT THE WORDS IN MOST
> OF THE SENTENCE. ACTUALLY, YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO GO THAT FAR. JUST REREAD
> THIS PARAGRAPH IN ALL LOWER CASE AND SEE HOW MUCH EASIER IT IS TO READ.

To be quite honest, the paragraph in upper case does tend
to slow down the reading speed, though I suspect that if you
use upper case often enough, your speed and comfortability
with it will improve over time.

On the other hand, you're asking us to compare a lower and
upper case selection of text above, but you've instead
provided an upper and *mixed* case text...big difference.

IMO, both pure upper and pure lower case texts are equally
inconvinient. That is why the concept of mixed case exists.
The reason it isn't common in the programming world is
probably because, it was (and is) easier to type in any one
case alone.

> This isn't brand new knowledge we're talking about here, this is information
> that typographics have known about for a couple hundred years. It is
> amusing listening to C programmers talk about how uppercase is easy to read,
> based only on a lame style convention that Ritchie invented back in the days
> when people didn't really know what readable code looked like.

I don't think anyone said that upper case were *easier* to
read. They are used in C mainly as a visual device to
seperate constants and macros from other elements of the
language. It was just to intimate the programmer when
reading over the source, not to make it easier to read.

In any non-trivial piece of source code, understanding
it's purpose, flow-of-execution and intent of the programmer
is *far* more difficult than it's case.

> As for monitor foreground and background colors, the easiest to read page is
> one that comes closest to matching the 18% gray scale that are eyes are
> accustomed to seeing in nature. That is, 72% white and 18% black. Easily
> achievable by putting black letters on a white background.

Speaking for myself, I find dull-white characters on a
black background more pleasing than other combinations.

Anyway, this is something that is purely an individual
taste, so generalising is not very wise. That's why
most video cards and OSes support different video modes/
themes etc.

> Difficult to
> achieve (in a readable form) by putting white letters on a black background
> (too much contrast).

I think black letters over a white background is
equally contrasting. My opinion of course. In both
cases the right thing is to adjust the brightness/
contrast settings of the monitor to suit individual
preference.

> Believe me, if reading white
> letters on a black background were truly more readable, that's what people
> would be looking at. Xerox, Apple, IBM, and Microsoft wouldn't have
> universally adopted the paper paradigm if they could achieve better results
> by changing the colors around.

I suspect that the reason companies like Microsoft
standardised on graphical desktops with the "paper
paradigm" for text fields was because it was more
friendly and re-assuring to computer novices, not
necessarily because it was easier to read.

.

Loading