One of Readable Web’s heroes, language maven William Safire, died yesterday of pancreatic cancer at the age of 79.

Safire was best known as a Pulitzer Prize-winning political columnist for the New York Times. But his deepest passion, and an endless source of delight to both Safire and his readers, was the English language. His weekly column “On Language”, first appeared in the New York Times Sunday Magazine in 1981.

Safire will live on as an inspiration here at RW, channeled in posts like Read An E-Book On An E-Reader With E-Ink On E-Paper, Today! and Fonts Yes, Foundries No.
And so, this feeble but heartfelt eulogy:

Bill, I hope it was a comfort knowing that all the “lexicographic irregulars” you left behind would step up. But we can only step up, and not into, your shoes. You were much too good and too self-styled for such a thing.
Here at Readable Web, I’ll be on the lookout for changes in language brought on by the movement of language from print to the networked screen. I’m just another web yenta, but I’ll do my best.
New behaviors, devices, and concepts bring new words and phrases. New words and phrases bring new behaviors, devices, and concepts. I’ll try to keep track of it, share it, and revel in it, as you always did.
Goodbye, and thanks.

William Safire at work.
No technophobe, the surrounding technology was, for 1984, state of the art.

The last “On Language” column written by William Safire was published on Sunday, Sept. 13, 2009, only fifteen days before his death. As always, it was filled with keen observations and wily wordplay.

Related posts:

1. Read An E-Book On An E-Reader With E-Ink On E-Paper, Today!

For most of the 500 or so years since printing began, typefaces were made out of cast metal. The com­pa­nies that pro­vid­ed them were called “found­ries” or, more specif­i­cally, “type foundries”.

Samples Of Cast-Metal Type. Today, the term "type foundry" is a relic, as useful as these.

Once computers ar­rived and of­f­set print­­ing re­placed let­ter­­press, type­­­faces were dig­i­tized and stored as com­put­er files. These files came to be called fonts — the word font e­volv­ing from an ear­li­er us­age mean­ing a col­lec­tion of one size only of the char­ac­ters mak­ing up a par­tic­u­lar type­face. Since the new dig­it­al files in­clud­ed all sizes of a type­face, the mean­ing was ad­just­ed slightly to fit, and thus the word “font” made a smooth tran­si­tion in­to the dig­it­al age.

For type­­­faces de­signed as a fam­i­ly with mul­ti­ple weights and vari­ants such as reg­u­lar, bold, i­tal­ic, me­di­um, small caps, con­densed, etc…, each mem­ber of the fam­i­ly is stored in it’s own file and is, on a technical level, a font in and of it­self.

Type­faces to­day are in­ex­tri­ca­bly bound to the font files used to de­fi­ne and dis­play them. The ver­y i­de­a of a type­face with­out a cor­re­spond­ing dig­it­al file is ob­so­lete. And so the words “type­­­face” and “font” have come to be used in­ter­change­ably. To those who would ar­gue that “font” refers to the dig­it­al file and “type­face” to the de­sign, I say fi­ne by me. But noth­ing much gets lost if the dis­tinc­tion isn’t made.

Foundries, No.

For the past month or so I’ve spent a good deal of time talk­ing and cor­re­spond­ing with type de­sign­ers and font ven­dors. One thing I’ve learn­ed is that there is no more a “font in­dus­try” than there is a “jazz in­dus­try”. Peo­ple get in­to it most­ly as a la­bor of love, and not a whole lot of mon­ey gets made. Few can make it work as a full-time oc­cu­pa­tion and need to mix in teach­ing and oth­er de­sign work to earn a liv­ing.

Now, as read­ers of this blog know, type de­sign­ers, web de­sign­ers, and brows­er mak­ers have got­ten in­to a bit of a tus­sle late­ly a­bout the li­cens­ing of fonts for use in web sites. In an oft-cited blog post on the sub­ject, ti­tled “Fuck The Foundries” au­thor Mark Pil­grim goes off on a bit of a rant about it.

Here’s a sample:

Seriously. Fuck them. They still think they’re in the business of shuffling little bits of metal around. You want to use a super-cool ultra-awesome totally-not-one-of-the-11-web-safe-fonts? Pick an open source font and get on with your life.

The cra­zy thing is, I could­n’t care less, ob­vious­ly, a­bout Mark’s use of the “F” word. I understand his anger and share in his frus­tra­tion. Yes, he’s quite wrong a­bout what busi­ness font mak­ers think they’re in but what re­al­ly bugs me is his use of the word “foundries” to cre­ate a false per­cep­tion to bol­ster his ar­gu­ment. It’s de­lib­er­ate rab­ble-​rous­ing and a dis­serv­ice to the read­ers of his blog.

Yeah! Screw those old-economy assholes!

Who are “The Foundries” of which he speaks? Well, who­ev­er they are, I don’t like the sound of them. A car­tel may­be? Def­i­nite­ly mon­o­lith­ic. Prob­a­bly mo­nop­o­lis­tic. And who would want to live in Pittsburgh, anyway?

You see, “type de­sign­ers” sounds kind of hu­man, and it’s a lot harder to say “Fuck You” to re­al peo­ple. But “The Foundries”, now, there’s a group you can safe­ly des­pise.

Some words can make the ev­o­lu­tion­ary cut and some just can’t. Un­like the word “font”, which nods to the past with­out bow­ing to it, the word “foundry” is for­ev­er a slave to its his­to­ry. The term “type foundry” is ar­cha­ic and right­ly de­serves to be thrown in the scrap-​heap as un­sal­vage­able. There are no type found­ries an­y­more, Mark. The peo­ple who make and mar­ket fonts have made the tran­si­tion from mol­ten met­al. In fact, some type de­sign­ers are al­so so­phis­ti­cat­ed pro­gram­mers and web de­sign­ers who could wrap your own skill-set a­round their lit­tle fin­gers. They certainly can mine.

If it seems remarkable that font producers might not feel good a­bout par­tic­i­pat­ing in and con­tri­but­ing to a sys­tem that en­cour­ages their work to be dis­trib­ut­ed with noth­ing in it for them in re­turn, so be it. But fictional “foun­dries” have got noth­ing to do with it.

In regards to typefaces, leave the word “foundry” to the history books, that’s where it be­longs.

Related posts:

1. Typedia: A Font Resource In The Making
2. Web Fonts At TypeCon 2009
3. An Interview With Kernest’s Garrick Van Buren

Those of us in technology get lost in a bubble. We forget that people go on­line for a value, not cool technology. Values like staying in touch with your friends; convenient shopping; keeping up with the news – that’s the stuff that counts. Click here to get this. Click there to get that.

I found the following video a fun reminder of how differently non-​tech­nic­al folks think. It rings true. I’ve taught new computer users. I’ve work­ed in a con­sumer electronics store. I’ve done desktop support. The news that few people know what a browser is doesn’t shock me one bit. And that many think the word “browser” is just another word for “search en­gine” — well, that makes perfect sense, too.

Tip: It’s fun but a little repetitive. You won’t miss much if you bail after a minute or two. Enjoy.

BTW – I also got a kick out of this personally because it was shot near Times Square right across the street from the offices of Viacom (MTV, Nickelodeon, etc.). Did a consulting gig there not too many years ago.
Once a New Yorker…

Related posts:

1. Google Starts Hosting @Font-Face Web Fonts

I’m confused. My Kindle is really an iRex 1000S. And when people ask if it’s an E-Book, I say “Yes”, but I really think “No”.
E-this. E-that. E-gads, what does it all mean?
Here’s my current dictionary for the world of digital books:

E-Book

An E-Book is not the hardware device with a screen that you hold in your hands. An E-Book is software. An E-Book is the digital file that holds the text and images that comprise the “book”. A PDF, for example. This distinction makes for clearer usage I think. So, in my head at least, that’s the way I’ve set it up.
In other heads, the terms “E-Book” and “E-Reader” are likely to get shuffled around and used interchangeably for some time.

E-Reader

An E-Reader is a hardware device on which you read E-Books. The Kindle is an E-Reader.
But if the history of brand names is any guide – to add to the confusion – ”Kindle” might quickly go from referring to a specific product to categorical catch-all, meaning simply, “E-Reader”. No matter what the manufacturer.
“Is that a Kindle?” Yeah, it’s an iRex Kindle. But the screen’s a little smudged, got a Kleenex? Thanks, you proved my point.

E-Ink

This term, I wish, would just go away. It does a lousy job of describing what it’s trying to describe. Where do you put a device that uses E-Ink to make sure it doesn’t leak accidentally and send you running to the dry-cleaners? Is my laptop display using Liquid Crystal Ink? And where can you buy E-Whiteout? Staples doesn’t have that, it seems.
Please move to the DO NOT USE column.

E-Paper

“E-Paper” does, nicely, describe the appearance of the kind of screens to be found on the Kindle and similar devices. This one’s a keeper.

The evolution of language is a fascinating sport where everyone gets to play.
About a month ago, I was flying from Florida to New York. Before takeoff, the flight attendant stopped by my seat, and said, “I’m sorry, sir, but you’ll have to turn off your book.” And then she grinned, leaned down a bit, and added, “You know, I just love getting to say that!”
I knew exactly what she meant.

Related posts:

1. E-Book Formats: The Mad Scramble
2. NYTimes Drops Microsoft For Adobe With Version 2 Of The NYTimes Reader
3. Two Joes On The State Of E-Books