[inamiyar]

This is maybe the third time I've seen the concept of a LaTeX styled html page and it never seems like a good idea to me. I'm all for math typesetting in HTML, but I no longer "believe" in justification, especially not browser's dissatisfying one-paragraph based techniques. But even with knuth-plass I have reasons to suspect ragged right text is better, see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27189306 I'm willing to change my mind with more evidence, justified text is pretty.

[inamiyar]

I also forgot to mention that for most people at low dpi (I would say 300dpi and lower, but I personally wouldn't use a serif till ~1500dpi) sans-serifs are more legible. This blog post has some good information: https://geniusee.com/single-blog/font-readability-research-f...

I had better sources at some point but I'll have to dig them up.

[dredmorbius]

Where are you getting 1500 DPI?

Most printers start at 300--600 DPI, before ink and/or toner bleed. 1200 DPI is photo-print level.

Serif at ~150+ DPI is both readable and preferable to sans IME.

Your referenced blog entry makes no mention of DPI that I find. And makes numerous grammatical choices which lead me to question its authority.

For printer DPI comparisons see: https://www.printerknowledge.com/threads/effective-print-out...

[leephillips]

I agree if you have in mind fonts with really thin serifs, such as the classic Computer Modern. But serif fonts in general seem fine to me at 300 dpi, or even 240 dpi. Readability depends more on the particular font used at a particular size, rather than whether it’s serif or not.

[inamiyar]

Yeah the serif/sans distinction is definitely down the list compared to font size, column width, line spacing, contrast, etc. I just brought it up because I consider it part of the "LaTeX" style. But you're right...something something premature optimization

[cryptonector]

Thanks for that informative link. I personally like ragged right text. I also like fixed-width fonts. Strange, I know.