Talk:Duospaced font

Typography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Graphic design Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Graphic design, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of graphic design-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Graphic designWikipedia:WikiProject Graphic designTemplate:WikiProject Graphic designGraphic design articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Relation with half-width and full-width forms

Duospaced fonts are related with half-width and full-width forms. However, in modern implementations, there exist proportional fonts that are not considered duospaced fonts which incorporate characters for half-width and full-width forms. So, there is a distinction to be made; the concept of duospaced fonts that is not strictly limited to Asian half-width and full-width forms. As one simple example of a non-asian associated, double-width glyph in a duospaced font, in GNU Unifont the Unicode character "Roman Numeral One Hundred Thousand" (U+2188) is mapped one such glyph. And fonts like Migu M2 have many double-width characters, including technical and pictographic symbols. Pointing these facts out as justification that the duospaced font article should not be consolidated into the half-width and full-width forms article.

— BrianKrent (talk) 18:47, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Writing out WT as WorldType

The bulleted list under the first paragraph of IBM's z/OS Font Collection literature names the duospaced fonts as "WorldType SansDuo" and "WorldType SerifDuo", but then later in the same literature, they refer to as simply "WT SansDuo" and "WT SerifDuo". Using the longer form of the name seems a little better, perhaps.

— BrianKrent (talk) 22:04, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Typeface vs. font

I feel that this article should be titled "Duospaced typeface", not "Duospaced font" due to fact that the dual-widths are an aspect of the design (typeface), not just its implementation (font). However, for consistency with the existing Monospaced font article, I used "font" instead of "typeface" in this article's title. Technically, "duospaced font" and "duospaced typeface" describe two separate but related notions — the former is in the context of the typeface design, and the latter is in the context of the font implementation used in typesetting.

— BrianKrent (talk) 22:52, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]