Type system for my publication

TYPEFACE

A group of people were presented with a number of typefaces and the design concepts from earlier: Helvetica Neue, Maison Neue Mono, San Francisco and Roboto, and asked which they would most associate with design for interfaces and which would be most appropriate for the book. The group concluded that Helvetica was too similar to a lot of the design books already out there and that it needed to differentiate, and that the unsuitability of Helvetica for digital interfaces would seem ironic. San Francisco would introduce an Apple-centric approach from the beginning, and Roboto would do the same for Google, even if both the typefaces would perform well. Maison Neue and Maison Neue Mono were decided upon as the final typefaces to go with for their unique but contemporary appearance, and Mono's visual link to early interfaces and sci-fi interfaces. 

Maison Neue Mono will be used for titles and headers to instil the technological look and feel of the publication. Maison Neue Medium will be used for the actual content to improve legibility and readability. Initially Maison Neue Book was used, but proved too thin and wiry in printed legibility tests. 

Generally type in books ranges from 8pt to 12pt depending on the nature of the book and the quantity of text. Since the text in my book will be relatively minimal, a text size of 10pt will allow for optimal readability and ideal space consumption. 

Note on Serif typefaces: Though commonly accepted, the superiority of serif typefaces is heavily disputed by growing sects of the typographic and scientific community. The argument in favour of serif typefaces is that they guide the horizontal “flow” of the eyes, allow for ample spacing between characters, increase the contrast between individual letterforms and allow words to bind into ‘functional wholes’, and that people generally prefer to read large bodies of text if they are set in a serif typeface. Others argue that Serifs actually disrupt character discrimination and add uneven appearance to the shape of strokes and characters. As concluded by Alex Poole: "[if there are indeed any differences in readability it is likely that they are so peripheral to the reading process that this effect is not even worth measuring, and that a greater difference in legibility can easily be found within members of the same type family than between a serif and a sans serif typeface. There are also other factors such as x-height, counter size, letter spacing and stroke width which are more significant for legibility than the presence or absence of serifs. Finally, we should accept that most reasonably designed typefaces in mainstream use will be equally legible, and that it makes much more sense to argue in favour of serif or sans serif typefaces on aesthetic grounds than on the question of legibility” (Alex Poole, 2008).

Poole, A. (2008) Alex Poole. Available at: http://alexpoole.info/blog/which-are-more-legible-serif-or-sans-serif-typefaces/ (Accessed: 14 December 2016).

Serif typefaces were explored in the beginning of the publication's development, but in critiques it was noted that a sans serif typeface would be more suitable for a book about mostly sans serif typefaces. More importantly, it was said that it would be a more appropriate decision stylistically for a book focused on technology and digital environments.   

LEADING/TRACKING

As stated by Josef Muller-Brockmann, leading is an important typographic feature to consider. If the distance between lines of text are too small or too great then the "optical picture" of the text can be adversely affected, discouraging the reader and creating an uncomfortable experience. If the lines are too far apart then the cohesion of the text is disrupted, and the lines appear independent and isolates. If the lines are too close together then the type appears too dark, and the lines forfeit their optical clarity. As a general rule the leading is often a few point sizes larger than the typeface itself. 

"Type in which the lines are well leaded soothe the reader's eye while stimulating [their] mind."