Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

To: wndawmn666
Did that make sense?

Yes. I have no idea what the "1" on the "real" typewriter typeface looks like.

Somebody will chip in here (If they haven't already)....

6,253 posted on 08/04/2009 12:24:51 PM PDT by null and void (We are now in day 195 of our national holiday from reality. - 0bama really isn't one of US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6181 | View Replies ]


To: null and void; OXENinFLA

To expand a little on my post from earlier noting the difference in the 1s on the Aussie BC. A few Freepers have suggested that perhaps the person that created the Aussie BC used the actual #1 key for the 10th of April and then fell back into old habits and used the lower case l throughout the rest of the document. I agree that it is very possible but something was still bugging me about how different the number 1 looked compared to everything else.

I tested some old typewriter fonts online: Typewriter Gothic & Typewriter.

I typed in 12345 and LLLLL (lower case though) so I could see the difference, if any, between the number 1 and the lower case l.

On the left is the Typewriter Gothic font which shows a number 1 similar to that on the Aussie BC which seems out of place. Notice that neither the number 1 nor the lower case l have the _ at the bottom.

On the right is the Typewriter font which shows the number one and the lower case l to be the same.

If an old typewriter had a functioning 1 key, would the lower case l look similar to the Typewriter Gothic font above? Meaning, would both the 1 and the lower case l be missing the _ at the bottom?

Would it be possible for an old typewriter to have two different ‘fonts’?


6,313 posted on 08/04/2009 2:24:55 PM PDT by wndawmn666
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6253 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson