Ron:
You might reconsider the smaller font, hence longer lines after reading Sheldon Wolf’s article at:
www.northstarcsi.com/PageFormat.pdf
(see his Sept 8th post)
Ron
PS (Sheldon): Great article! Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
Wow! I had always heard that “body copy” in a serif font was easier to read and “headlines” in a sans serif font were easier to read. The Helvetica/Universe/Arial font was developed specifically for recognition and readability on signage.
I would like to use something other than Times New Roman or Arial, but these are such common fonts and can be found on 99.9 percent of the computers in service. Optima (my favorite) or Century Schoolbook (or Goudy Old Stile or Palantino or …) are, in my opinion, much more attractive fonts, but I have run into problems when I am required to transfer word processing files with these fonts to others for their review or use.
I use a 11 pt. Times New Roman for specification text at the Paragraph level and below and 10 pt. Arial bold for the Part and Article levels. The “bulk” on the Arial gives the impression of its being the same size, and the bold type seems to assist in finding information.
I do make use of templates and styles on my documents so I could accomodate a change in font very easily. Even if this were to happen at the end of the project ("Oh! didn’t we tell you? We require … ").
Formatting is interesting since the format in which text is presented is controlled by the settings on the output device. I can change the font on many web pages myself by changing the settings on my software. Some may have had the experience of a carefully paginated spec being printed out differently on a different printer. If you have one laser printer at your desk that you use while you are editing, and another printer for final production (either inhouse or a service), you will find differences in the way they handle the font (letterspace, kerning, etc.) that can cause unexpected results. This has to do with the drivers for various output devices.
I have begun to print my “final” to Adobe Acrobat creating a .pdf file. This file prints out the same no matter where you send it (as long as you don’t change the magnification). This makes the final appearance less dependent on the specific device used for printing–and I have an electronic record for the project files or for distribution.
Another thing to keep in mind is which font, and in which size, remains easier to read after multiple generations of copying or faxing, since most contractors copy and fax sections to subcontractors and suppliers.
Regarding Ron’s post about the alpha-numeric section numbering - As late as 1990 (maybe even later), at least one firm that I know of still utilized this method. For as long as MasterFormat has been around, that’s a bit late / long to not have implemented it.
I use Times New Roman 11 for the body. It is what Masterspec uses. I change the header and footer to Times New Roman 12 so it can stand out a bit. I also BOLD the section title, and 3 part titles as well as the end of section. This helps with finding relavent info when searching over the specs. Why make it more complicated - KISS principle!
I note that many of these postings are talking about using smaller and smaller pt. - form 11 to 10 to 9, with footers at 7.
For those who are considering going to small sizes, have you given any thought to the “readability index”, especially for the older people who need the “slightly larger letters”. As the population and the workforce ages, their ability to read small things also gets worse. It would be interesting - and in a way a shame - to see a contractor use as his/her defense that the type was too small for him/her to read and therefore the designer was age discriminating against him/her.
Of course, if you sign your work “Anonymous” you can never be sued for anything.