Talk:2736: Only Serifs

first two letters are "A" and "R" I think 172.71.167.10 04:35, 11 February 2023 (UTC)Bumpf

It's AaBbCcDd. Most likely in Caslon, based on the uppercase A. 172.68.174.149 04:54, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

So much for a hidden message. 172.68.238.22 05:05, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

If we've come to this page for an explanation, we probably don't know what a "solum-serif font" is. update the transcript with something more widely known? 172.69.65.224 05:42, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, enthusiastically! Someone trying to show off, Google doesn't even know what it means, it found ONE result, which is a font of curved corners someone made (when I put "solum-serif" in quotes, to not allow Google to just search one or the other). But while I was Googling someone fixed it before I could, LOL! Which is weird as it's past midnight here in the Eastern time zone. :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 05:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps you haven't realised that nighttime for Americans is daytime for, um, somewhere around 80-90% of the world's population? Paddles (talk) 14:54, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Of course I realize this. :) Seems like YOU don't realize that this site is one of many where it seems like most activity centers around the EST time zone... Perhaps related to Randall being in this time zone, perhaps not, but I'm usually alone at this time of night (for example, I almost NEVER get Edit Conflicts because seemingly everyone is asleep). For years I'm almost always the only person making contributions at this hour. Maybe think of that before making a misguided condescending reply. :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 06:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

You really live up to your username, eh? Charming and US-centric.

I think that's probably because it was a joke. In fact the ridiculous of the notion of a "solum-serif" font is more or less the entirety of the joke of this comic. You're right, in the future we should make sure that these descriptions are devoid of humor.172.70.211.92 18:17, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

But that's in the transcript particularly, the transcript should make sense as to what the image shows without prior knowledge 108.162.216.10 02:45, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Yes, as Mr./Ms. 216.10 pointed out, this was the transcript. PLENTY of room for jokes in the Explanation, but the Transcript should be as concise and straightforward as possible, in an effort to be clear. NOT the place for what seemed to be a self-coined term and trying to be clever. :) I've heard some blind and sight-impaired people follow the comic by having a reading program read these Transcripts, last thing they need is a non-word the program might trip over and can't define for them. NiceGuy1 (talk) 06:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Exactly the transcript should not try to explain the comic. But should include all text as written text for later possibility to search for it. And finally the image should be described in some detail for those that are sight impaired. --Kynde (talk) 13:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

For anyone who is confused, 'solum' (solus) is Latin for 'only', as opposed to 'sans' (from the Latin 'sine'), without. I suppose the joke is rather hard to get, though, since the top Google search results for 'solum' refer to soil. (Not my joke, by the way. Also, first ever comment - hope I've done this right.) CryptekCathekh (talk) 21:21, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, yes that makes sense. And yes, finely commented there. :) Yes, I got loads of industrial results for "Solum", which is why I had to force the search to include the "serif". NiceGuy1 (talk) 06:19, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

There was a whole thing on Wikipedia about formatting the f symbol for an arbitrary function. One camp held that f is just f, it always is and always was and if you italicize f in a san-serif font, you get an oblique f but if you italicize f in a serif font, you get a proper italic version, which I'm not sure how to display here. The italic f resembles ƒ, a character called the "hooked f," which is technically an oblique f with a descender ("hook"). That symbol has been used for florins, but sometimes it is also used to imitate the italic f to represent functions, because it has the descender in all environments. But Wikipedia uses a san-serif script, while most mathematical literature uses a serif script. However, it renders expressions in LaTeX with serif fonts and therefore these equations get an f with a descender. So some people were arguing that given this environment, the ƒ character was practically superior, even if it was conceptually wrong, because it most closely resembled the formatted LaTeX expressions. And on and on with the back and forth. I'm glad they eventually settled on just using f for f, like they use g for g and h for h, but still, it was amusingly nitpicky. 172.70.100.50 07:58, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

What you listed as resembling italic f looks on my system like ⨍. There are lots of fun variations (some unrelated, just similar looking): ∫⨎ʄ∮∬∰⨏ƒʆᶘᔑ Fabian42 (talk) 08:48, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

That entire argument seems silly. Obviously the correct answer to "how do you write the function $f$ outside of math mode" is "don't". Just use math mode and let KaTeX handle the formatting. --162.158.63.61 16:48, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

The title text teases the idea of a font made by adding the Times New Roman serifs to Comic Sans, and now I actually want to see such a cursed font. 108.162.241.237 11:03, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Ask and ye shall receive:  :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Is it weird that I kind of like Sans New Roman? (anonymous) 12:49, 13 February 2023 (EST)

Thanks I will include this in the explanation. Great work. Ugly as hell ;-) It might send some graphic designers your way! ;-) --Kynde (talk) 13:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I think Caslon is correct: Caslon Overlay Low Opacity Overlay via questions in Identifont. If someone can add these to the wiki, please do. DragonDave (talk) 12:55 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I wonder if this is related to the US State Department dropping Times Roman in favor of Calibri, under the argument that the latter is easier to read. --172.70.114.198 13:47, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I call these fonts seul serif, keeping with the theme of using French terminology. 172.71.147.59 16:30, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

A free, existing example of Comic Serif. 172.70.214.242 16:43, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

^ TBH Comic Serif doesn't look half bad, if only it had a consistent baseline 198.41.231.179 17:01, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

Of course, since Comic is supposed to mimic casual handwriting, and people don't hand write serifs ^{[citation needed]}, this messes up the concept, LOL! NiceGuy1 (talk) 07:02, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Does not, if you go back far enough. Remember that a lot of old handwriting had serif-like parts due to the use of quills.

True enough, but going back isn't appropriate, as computers AREN'T "back far enough", or at all. :) NOW, in the present day, nobody handwrites serifs. NiceGuy1 (talk) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

This comic reminds me of something I once actually did as a child: I once wrote a notepad full of game ideas and story concepts but wanted to keep them a secret; so I created my own "cipher" font where any straight lines in letters were removed, leaving only the curved lines. However, because some letters such as c and d would look similar without the straight lines, I gave some letters curved "serifs", which would be retained in my "font". [email protected] 20:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm most instances where the word "font" is used, the correct word is "typeface". "Times Roman" is a typeface whereas "Times Roman bold" is a font. -Jez 172.70.93.42 20:56, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I'd be inclined to suggest that "font", in common parlance, means what everyone here means it to mean, and that means that it is "correct". Nobody - OK, fine, potentially a negligible number of people - might wonder what's going on when "font" is used where you would prefer "typeface". It's not a matter of being "correct" though, unless we are (and we aren't) a community of people using typesetting language in a formal, technical sense. You know what is incorrect though? Writing "I'm" when you mean "In". Would I have said any of that had you not been so pedantic? You bet your sweet ass I wouldn't.Yorkshire Pudding (talk) 22:08, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Yorkshire Pudding there said everything I was tempted to and more last night, but said better than I would have. Thank you! NiceGuy1 (talk) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

That can't POSSIBLY be the right link under the word "events". We have an entire category of "my hobby"/"Cueball getting kicked out of events" comics and that isn't any of them. 172.71.158.90 22:29, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

I concur. It links directly to comic 514, which has nothing to do with events or getting kicked out (I can't even think what comic they meant). I took a peek at 1514 and 2514, but those don't fit, either. ??? NiceGuy1 (talk) 07:07, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Maybe 541 was meant? But I guess just linking to Category:Banned_from_conferences or even adding this to Category:Compromise would be better. --198.41.242.166 14:58, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Yup, I feel sure you got it. I tried checking around 514 (going up to like 518, going down to like 510), didn't try transposing the digits. What's funny is that I often think of that specific comic 541, whenever I want a smiley face inside brackets, :) I'll update the explanation. EDIT: Ugh, someone removed it instead of fixing it. :( NiceGuy1 (talk) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It looks very similar to Comic Sands by tom7! 172.71.30.106 16:49, 12 February 2023 (UTC)Bumpf

Oh incredible, I quite like the "futura work" section of that paper MrCandela (talk) 03:52, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

A note for No Idea If There's A Character Limit LMAO

(...because you don't have a Talk page I can write to...)

In response to recent edits from you with, for example, "(am i doing something wrong? THERE ARE TWO MANY JOKE TAGS!)" as the comment... The tag is the Incomplete (i.e. {{incomplete}}, and it is indeed arguable if all those marked as such are truly so (though you can bet your bottom dollar that plenty of times where the tag is removed, someone will then quite soon find something worth editing into an Explanation). But the "joke tag" is the community replacing the 'Bot-created reference to being created by A BOT with something an editor decides is funny. (They aren't always right, but someone else may impose their own humour - right or wrong - in place of the first comedian's attempt... And possibly the process repeats a few more times.)
So, anyway, that's what the joke part of the tag is about, though the presence of the tag itself is a bit more serious. Maybe you could say that an explanation a couple of weeks old (from time of creation, at comic-publication) is only going to be 'normally and irregularly tweaked, from now on', and so would lose the Incompleteness happily enough, but some might say sooner or later than that, perhaps depending upon the comic concerned. Mega-comics in particular (e.g. interactive April Fool ones, or Time-like in scope, or those needing a "larger" version to be linked to to red properly) where genuinely there are potentially still more discoveries to be made for quite some time.
Far more certain are the Incomplete Transcript statuses, because as soon as everything in the comic image is properly described (give or take subjective opinions), and it's in the de facto meta-notation, then removal of that status can be swift and painless (and still open to edits). Though do note that Transcripts do not currently need to contain the Title Text (it's already transcribed into the comic template header area, if done correctly), and in fact this is discouraged by the consensus view. The transcript just puts in text what is not aready in machine-readable text (for various purposes). So it's not Incomplete if every bit of Randall-drawn text is in there, every bit of drawn imagery is (sufficiently) described and - if necessary - the layout and relationships of things are also described (e.g, "There is a table which has...", rather than trying to render the table only in wikitable markup). It may not be correct, but it should at least be considered complete, give or take a detail or so. ;)
You might understand the community process best by actually going through page history for a comic's page, from the very first creation by theusafBOT (or whoever) and looking at successive diff-pages. Depends on how much time you have, though :-p 172.70.162.223 01:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Who are you talking to? There's no comment like that or user name like that here (at least I don't see a comment when scanning through them). I was GOING to say instead of relying on a Talk page you should Reply to his comment, with a colon, like this... NiceGuy1 (talk) 08:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

There's a relatively new user, who has (it seems) being confused over (+ removing), Incomplete template stuff. They currently have no Talk page, so looks like the chosen approach to 'message' them was to post something in the latest Discussion spot and hope they spot it by default. May not be the ideal way, but I can imagine it maybe working?

My POV is that Incomplete tags are supposed to help direct people to explanations needing completing, but don't really. For several reasons both technical and logistical. So their harmless fall-back as a s/A BOT/SOMETHING 'FUNNY'/ canvas is probably more a thing to be cherished. Which is not to say that they should stay that way forever, but I wouldn't persoally rush to remove them.

(And, though it may confuse new readers, as with Citation Needed, if it gets them thinking about what they might add then it's a sneaky nudge to get fresh blood actively into the editing community. Win-win? Opinions will vary!) 172.70.162.134 12:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm gonna make the comic sans/times new roman hybrid when I can get some time. Just calling dibs! Mushrooms (talk) 07:54, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

yeah, this is just "comic serif". It already exists here Mushrooms (talk) 08:00, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

No it's not, it SAYS "remove the serifs from Times and add them to Comic", Comic Serif has its own serifs AND is missing a Times missing serifs. :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 08:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I already decided last night I would and I just made it before I read your dibs, guess I should have said something, :) Not going to throw out my work! :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 08:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It's fine! I kinda abandoned it anyways and I don't think I would have done quite as good a job Mushrooms (talk) 09:04, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I'd gotten as far as starting to manually tweak the tween-frames in a rather self-indulgent animated version. But your thing is as good as needs to be, and I don't have upload permissions here anyway, so it would have been too much fuss and probably just contributed to my own personal procrastination over the weekend. ;)

In case anyone wanted to know what it would look like if you moved the serifs from Times New Roman to Comic Sans, here's the before and after. :) NiceGuy1 (talk) 08:22, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Please also adapt the kerning! This hurts my eyes. --198.41.242.166 11:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Randall's font isn't only serifs - there are some ball terminals in there as well.172.70.91.114 11:59, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Any guesses on what the text in the comic actually says? 172.70.111.75 15:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

As the second comment in this talk box suggest, I think the serifs are consistent with AaBbCcDd (an easy way to showcase a typeface in a few characters). If I'm not mistaken, the transcript used to imply as much as well; does anyone know why that was removed, and can we be confident enough about the text to put that back in the transcript?

Also, sorry about not signing above. Dextrous Fred (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

It's also mentioned in the (rather long) first paragraph of the Explanation. Better place. Might do better with some restructuring of the text, I might split/refactor the scrawl at some point, along the lines of various sub-points all squashed in there... 172.70.91.113 23:06, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

I wonder whether this was a play on Only Fans -> Only Sans -> Only Serifs? 172.70.230.25 (talk) 03:22, 14 February 2023 (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

Maybe, but I was thinking more like the "noinclude", "onlyinclude" and "includeonly" wikimarkup, such that "noinclude""onlyinclude" stuff will be seen here, that which is "onlyinclude""noinclude" does not and the third tag would seem to do nothing unusual withinentirely override the rest of this page, but it would all be different if viewing it from the Explaindirectly as the Talk page. 172.70.162.135 13:44, 14 February 2023 (UTC)