These kinds of fonts do not help dyslexics at all. Children in fact show a preference for reading in Arial and Times New Roman. Some research has shown that increased letter spacing results in fewer errors, but studies are not unanimous about this.
I really don't get this vibe. It's not like this is some potentially-harmful fake medicine, or an expensive scam.
From the very top of the page:
> If you like the way you are able to read this page, and others, then this typeface is for you!
Even if that's a "yes" for only 2% of dyslexics, then isn't that good enough? Why can't a reader decide for themselves whether they find that page easier to read than most?
$332/mo of "can disappear at any time" donations aren't much at all.
There are WAY easier ways to do scams earning much more with much less effort.
Plus even if it does not reliably help dyslexic people, if it helps or is liked by the people who donate it's not a scam at all, even if the since behind it turns out to be incorrect.
My first impresion of this is that it might be a good idea to add a button to my blog changing the fonts with this one for accessibility.
Aside from the obvious cost to me (and limited benefit to others), implementing this might make me more resistant to doing something else that actually helps.
> Even if that's a "yes" for only 2% of dyslexics, then isn't that good enough? Why can't a reader decide for themselves whether they find that page easier to read than most?
If a drug cures 2% cases of cancer patients, with absolutely no downside, it wouldn't be a cure for cancer. It would be incredible, but still it cannot be claimed to be a cure for cancer.
The name and branding all suggest the font to counter dyslexia generally. That would be ridiculously misguiding if it only helps tiny fraction of dyslexia. Is it a helpful invention? But it's far from what the branding promises.
Of course readers can decide for themselves whether it works for them or not; but a misleading branding is still misleading.
I don’t see this website claiming anything bold or misleading, the intro paragraph is very modest, and there is a HN commenter who already feels its helpful. And you don’t go around naming your domain opendyslexiafontbutforonlysomedyslexics.org
I have dyslexia (or slysdexia), and I do get this negative "vibe". If fact, I get it very well.
Over the years I've seen my share of these "fonts for dyslectic people". I often looked at them with high hopes, only to feel disappointed by how not a single one had any significant effect on me. Sure, most of them looked clean and tidy (but so do many other fonts), and there sure are other fonts that make things a hell of a lot worse (although maybe not as much is some might think).
Time and again, I find the claims associated with these fonts just falling short (if not totally bogus). Actually, from my personal experience I find this the whole concept, that a font will significantly impact or solve this problem, rather preposterous and maybe even insulting. Even to a level that it sounds mostly like irritating marketing snake oil, at least to me. I'm not saying that these fonts have not been made with only the best of intentions. Maybe they all are. But their presentation certainly ruins that for me.
From my own experiences, I simply can't agree with what all of these fonts claim to do (at least not more than what many other, more commonly used, fonts already do). But the assumption that this problem can be fixed with a font, annoys me most of all.
Even if it does help some people, it may also do a huge disservice to everyone for which it does nothing, while claiming or implying how it should improve their situation too.
After many years of receiving my own share of: "why don't you just read properly", please consider me edgy and easily triggered on the subject.
I’m sorry for your experience but dyslexia is not a singular condition and not everyone responds to the same stimuli.
OpenDyslexia has been a godsend for our family. I’m sorry it doesn’t work for you. I also know someone who found that coloured lenses helped her, but it made no difference to us.
Please, don't get me wrong. I'm not sure if you did, but it appears that you might have.
I do not really have any personal issue with my condition. Everyone who needs to know does, and it's never a show-stopper for anything essential in my life.
I do sincerely thank you for your sympathy/empathy, but it's not something I actually need. I've learned to live with and around dyslexia a long time ago, rather similar to how somebody with a physical handicap since birth no doubt would.
I honestly would not be surprised if it's a complex condition indeed. I would be even less surprised if different conditions ended up being classified under the same moniker, just because they share superficial symptoms (for this is how our healthcare systems function, especially for most mind related topics). I'm not having any issue with that either.
However, what pisses me off, is when people claim to have a solution that just isn't. I don't think it's just me. I know (quite) a few more people with dyslexia, but I don't recall any of them ever having any significant benefit from any of these "special" fonts (beyond comparing them to fonts that probably would confuse most "ordinary" people too).
I would honestly like to hear from other people with dyslexia, if there is even a single one among them that had a real significant benefit from any of these fonts. Because so far, I have never met one.
I again would like to stress that these efforts may nonetheless be pursued with nothing but good intentions. Still, as the saying goes ... the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Only to illustrate the principle, but certainly not to imply that the effects are even remote comparable: the colonial missionaries who came to "spread religion and culture" to the "savages in the new worlds", did often have sincere intentions (yet extremely misguided and wrong on so many levels, as most sane people today will instantly agree with). Even though the example is extreme, I hope it helps to understand why I have an issue with "doing good" for the wrong reasons in general. It has a remarkable habit of ending up more harmful than good.
We experimented with heaps of different fonts, colours, sizes, and OpenDyslexic is the one thing that worked the dyslexic in our family. It has significantly changed our lives for the better.
You’re doing people a huge disservice by dismissing it out of hand or sprouting some bullshit about children’s preferences. It costs literally nothing to try out - you just have to visit the web page ffs - and it either works or it doesn’t, but if it works it can be life changing.
> In two experiments, the claim was tested that the font “Dyslexie”, specifically designed for people with dyslexia, eases reading performance of children with (and without) dyslexia. Three questions were investigated. (1) Does the Dyslexie font lead to faster and/or more accurate reading? (2) Do children have a preference for the Dyslexie font? And, (3) is font preference related to reading performance? In Experiment 1, children with dyslexia (n = 170) did not read text written in Dyslexie font faster or more accurately than in Arial font. The majority preferred reading in Arial and preference was not related to reading performance. In Experiment 2, children with (n = 102) and without dyslexia (n = 45) read word lists in three different font types (Dyslexie, Arial, Times New Roman). Words written in Dyslexie font were not read faster or more accurately. Moreover, participants showed a preference for the fonts Arial and Times New Roman rather than Dyslexie, and again, preference was not related to reading performance. These experiments clearly justify the conclusion that the Dyslexie font neither benefits nor impedes the reading process of children with and without dyslexia.
It is not some bullshit about children's preferences, it's a pretty reasonable way to evaluate a font in a more objective setting.
It's one study that says that one font (not the same one) didn't appreciably help a handful of kids with and without dyslexia. It's interesting, but not enough to make any kind of generalization. Heck, without being independently reproduced, it's not enough to make its own claims.
The study used word lists vs. prose. I'm no expert, but that limits a reader's abilities for pattern recognition. Also, the age and reading experience of the reader may have bearing on the potential benefits. This just looked at children (otherwise unspecified).
To me, the interesting finding there is that preference does not correlate to speed or accuracy for the given task. It might be that even kids just pick the one they think is prettier and that even with kids most folks "like" clean-lined sans-serif.
I know design folks say that sans-serif are good for signs, titles, etc. (which would apply to bear words) and serif are better for prose. I have no idea if there's good data to back that up, though.
I didn’t read the whole study but it certainly seemed flawed to me.
- dyslexia is a condition, not a disease. The underlying problem is not well understood and there are probably multiple causes. The study groups all children together as if they are identical.
- the font is successful if any child benefits from it, not if a majority or average benefit. This kind of flaw seems prevalent in many studies. If it makes reading faster for some children then it’s a benefit. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t work for everyone.
- it doesn’t look like these tests were reading-out-loud tests, which is specifically where we have seen the most improvement. In my experience OpenDyslexic improved reading out loud which lead to improved silent reading and significantly improved comprehension over a period of weeks. The important thing here is that dyslexic children use coping mechanisms such as skimming to give the appearance of being able to read like their peers (at least this was this case for us).
Given my own personal experience in which OpenDyslexic (not Dyslexie) has been life changing for my family, the study appears to be bullshit. While I haven’t examined the study in detail, it is not clear that the findings justify the very strong claims that it makes.
The research on OD and Dyslexie is mixed, but I added it to my Chrome extension, which is designed to improve readability. [1] Before we added it, it was probably our most-requested feature.
I don't think their website even uses their own font. It looks like Comic Sans or something, not like the example on https://www.opendyslexic.org/about
That page was incredible difficult for me to read.
I actually started and stopped about 10 times because it was so..... disorienting, it almost had me dizzy, and it caused me to jump around on the page.
I get that the change in stroke width is supposed to create "weight", but it honestly looks too half-thin and half-bold, or like the text was written in wet paint and the paint is dripping down. Pretty confusing to read with.
I tried this in a few different browsers but the pages weren't rendered in that font as the site indicates. Instead it seems to be rendered in Comic Sans.
The thing is it kinda forces me to read the text word by word and makes it much easier to correctly read the words.
I'm very minimal reading dyslexic (it's a bit complex).
Anyway while it doesn't fell like it would allow me to read faster, I believe it does help me to read more correct. Through I have to test it out more. I thing I will try it the next time I write a paper or similar. Also it's very different to many other font's so maybe it's just about getting used to it?
This is probably due to the fact that when we usually read, we just perform some kind of "pattern recognition" without even thinking about it: we just look at the first letters and the last ones, and our brain makes up the word as we read it [0].
Probably this font forces us to read letter by letter, and this is what makes it easier for dyslexic people to read the text (they don't get confused too much of the next / previous characters), and so difficult for people who aren't used to read letter by letter.
I was actually wondering if the font really looked similar to comic sans intentionally. I was already thinking "might that be a reason to why it's unconciously used a lot?"
The it's dubious argument seems compelling but I still tend towards the it helps belief probably just because I have spent some time thinking the first argument was true and the second argument has not yet managed to win through that habit.
> One research was comparing Omotype with Dyslexie, the other with Open Dyslexic.
I see. I missed that.
> OmoType is free for personal use.
By “freely licensed” I was referring to free as in freedom.
On that note, where can I download OmoType? I see I can download software that uses OmoType, but I can’t seem to find where to download the font itself.
I'm dyslexic and on my kindle I use the OpenDyslexic font. Which works really well for me!
The bottom half of the letters are a bit fatter which makes it easier in my head to read. I have no idea what's the science behind this. It's makes it easier for me to read a bit longer without getting sick of reading.
Not sure if it's faster than other fonts but it reads more relaxed.
OpenDyslexic has been around since 2011. Often the best font for dyslexics is one that they are used to reading – switching the fonts is one of the main problems.
Apps should generally have the ability to allow for custom fonts so dyslexic users can customise them and use their favourite font.
On the topic of fonts, my favourite new learning 'enhancing' font is Sans Forgetica [1] – it's been proven to help you retain and memorise text. Pretty cool.
I had to change my mother tongue from Italian to Portuguese when I was 6 and it was kind of strange, but after a while it simply felt normal except for a couple of things.
I'm not dyslexic but sometimes it is hard for me to focus on long texts, I keep skipping words and going back and forth... although I can read quite fast sometimes I read a word for another, when I was a kid it took me quite some time to correctly visualize that "already" is written like that and not "aldeary" and the same thing for a small number of other words. (thanks Baldur's Gate, thanks Ocarina of Time)
When I first opened the site with www it simply felt like a normal sans-serif font (as it was), after reading luisroy comment I changed to the site without www and I must say that it is way easier to read... don't know if it's the spacing or something else, or maybe I'm dyslexic, who knows...
I just tried, I read waaay slower with one eye closed so yeah I read the lines sequentially but it's kind of unpractical.
Anyway I have that "eye skipping" thing not just during reading but also in average life situations, when talking to someone I keep changing focus: eyes, mouth, nose, hands, cheeks, right eye, left hand, dog on the background, etc.
If I stare at something trying to keep the focus one of two things happen:
I imagine it’s slower but is it more accurate? I tend to think one of symptoms of dyslexia is poor eye convergence. I’d love to try it on people who find it incredible difficult to read; if you’re starting from the point of an near inability to see words without them (or your eye) jumping then it may be helpful.
It's one of the reasons I bought a Kobo e-reader is because they had support for a Dyslexia font (not sure which one it is but looks similar). For me that font helped me in both reading speed and correctness.
I can now enjoy any book while before I would sometimes buy a book but never manage to read it correctly since the font would throw me off.
I can only applaud the initiative but I can get that its not for every person with dyslexia.
Not to diminish the excellent work that the font community has done in creating this, but part of me wonders if this is the same font that the Petscop creator used.
I was told I have dyslexia at a really young age. If so, it's really minor. I'll occasionally have to pause to remember which way a b goes versus a d. Sometimes I'll mix up in reading something like a license plate number.
This is all super anecdotal, but I've lost countless hours debugging stuff, only to find that ive called fidnAllDocs instead of findAllDocs. Even when looking for a typo in that specific variable, I'll miss it multiple times.
A while back I switched to open dyslexic in my terminal and editor. This issue has gone from every couple weeks to practically never.
Some people hate it, but it's definitely worth a shot
Oo a fixed-width version of this font could be a great idea! (Am not dyslexic, so am not quite sure if fixed-width will make it more difficult, but if it can be avoided, boom)
On the Github it lists a mono font among the styles: "OpenDyslexic, in Regular, Bold, Italic, and BoldItalic. Also, OpenDyslexic Mono, and OpenDyslexic Rounded: intentionally lower contrast." https://github.com/antijingoist/opendyslexic#styles
I do in fact see an OpenDyslexicMono font after downloading it. I can't vouch for how good the font is though, since I'm not dyslexic.
It has, and I use, the mono version. Also, ive seen decent arguments in support of non monospace, as it makes typos of text that should be the same, but isn't, more aparrent when on adjacent lines. But I've been using mono for a while and never had an reason to try non-mono
I feel your pain on this. I'm curious to see if other people find it helps. My instinct is that its much harder to read compared to something like zilvertype. But then I _had_ dysgraphia, rather than full bore dyslexia.
I used to have an artificial intelligence project that I worked on, (which I never completed), and one insight that I had was that there are certain things that a neural net can learn, but there are certain things it can’t. You have to program in time invariance as an assumption, that the same object can have the same meaning when you see it a second time. And, you have to make position invariance and rotation invariance as an explicit assumption too in your image recognition model. My guess is that the human brain has some dedicated hardware somewhere that rotates every object it sees and matches it in different ways, and my guess is that in dyslexic people that hardware is a bit different. I hesitate to say wrong, because that’s a value judgement, but different.
This font is amazing. It’s like the letters and words finally jump out rather than then blend into a mush. Having this on Kindle is a game changer. I’m still upset Pocket got rid of the font though. That was one of the main reasons I started using Pocket.
This looks like something that should be up to the user's browser rather than the website. If you built this into your website you'd probably need a setting to turn it on or off (because the font is kinda hard to read for non-dyslexic people) which would always degrade the experience for one group (based on the default setting) or even make them more identifiable (if stored in persistent storage).
That font is hideous! It only extenuates the bottom of the text, especially on capitals which don't need enhancing because they're already in CAPS. Paragraphs of text in caps just become noise, blocks of letters rather than words.
That font also looks like the top of the line has been rubbed off, making things far worse as the top of the text has cues to recognise words. I believe that's my issue with caps as it makes words hard to read as I see blocks of letters, not words.
The biggest change I make the text easier to read is to increase the font size a couple of points or zoom in a little (ctrl + mouse wheel/ +-). Right now hacker news is at 150% zoom (snapped to the left side of a 43" 4K monitor).
Also, I prefer not use windows scaling as it wastes a lot of pixels with bigger menu bars (my eyesight is fine). One more thing... I'm very particular about the screen brightness (there's an app called clickMonitorDDC that let's you change screen brightness from mouse wheel or keyboard (crtl+shift+ up/ down)), and blue light filter at night. I find I can focus better in the evening/ night but I believe that's more of an ADHD thing.
I get the intention, and if it wasn't obvious in my previous post; I have dyslexia. Font sizing on computer screens is complex, fonts don't scale perfectly, they have sweet spots where line thickness spills over. When you configure ClearType on Windows it's quite evident where curtain parts of curtain words spill over (a similar fashion to Open Dyslexic actually). Looking at different sized text, it's the line thickness that aids readability rather than the size of the font.
I pretty sure this is the basis of why serif fonts aren't as readable on computer displays, the serifs add more noise rather than help.
I'm old dyslexic and have been reading so long by pattern matching that this actually hurts my brain and induces the problem. Actually got a headache just from trying to re-read the first paragraph.
80 comments
[ 3.1 ms ] story [ 130 ms ] threadhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5934461
From the very top of the page:
> If you like the way you are able to read this page, and others, then this typeface is for you!
Even if that's a "yes" for only 2% of dyslexics, then isn't that good enough? Why can't a reader decide for themselves whether they find that page easier to read than most?
There are WAY easier ways to do scams earning much more with much less effort.
Plus even if it does not reliably help dyslexic people, if it helps or is liked by the people who donate it's not a scam at all, even if the since behind it turns out to be incorrect.
It’s reading. You know if it helps you or not because suddenly the words stop swimming around.
Because they think it helps other people?
My first impresion of this is that it might be a good idea to add a button to my blog changing the fonts with this one for accessibility.
Aside from the obvious cost to me (and limited benefit to others), implementing this might make me more resistant to doing something else that actually helps.
If a drug cures 2% cases of cancer patients, with absolutely no downside, it wouldn't be a cure for cancer. It would be incredible, but still it cannot be claimed to be a cure for cancer.
The name and branding all suggest the font to counter dyslexia generally. That would be ridiculously misguiding if it only helps tiny fraction of dyslexia. Is it a helpful invention? But it's far from what the branding promises.
Of course readers can decide for themselves whether it works for them or not; but a misleading branding is still misleading.
I don’t see the misleading part tbh.
I mean the website itself is written in its own font, it’s gonna be pretty clear to a dyslexic if it’s gonna help or not.
Over the years I've seen my share of these "fonts for dyslectic people". I often looked at them with high hopes, only to feel disappointed by how not a single one had any significant effect on me. Sure, most of them looked clean and tidy (but so do many other fonts), and there sure are other fonts that make things a hell of a lot worse (although maybe not as much is some might think).
Time and again, I find the claims associated with these fonts just falling short (if not totally bogus). Actually, from my personal experience I find this the whole concept, that a font will significantly impact or solve this problem, rather preposterous and maybe even insulting. Even to a level that it sounds mostly like irritating marketing snake oil, at least to me. I'm not saying that these fonts have not been made with only the best of intentions. Maybe they all are. But their presentation certainly ruins that for me.
From my own experiences, I simply can't agree with what all of these fonts claim to do (at least not more than what many other, more commonly used, fonts already do). But the assumption that this problem can be fixed with a font, annoys me most of all.
Even if it does help some people, it may also do a huge disservice to everyone for which it does nothing, while claiming or implying how it should improve their situation too.
After many years of receiving my own share of: "why don't you just read properly", please consider me edgy and easily triggered on the subject.
#end-of-rant
OpenDyslexia has been a godsend for our family. I’m sorry it doesn’t work for you. I also know someone who found that coloured lenses helped her, but it made no difference to us.
Like most things in life, YMMV.
I do not really have any personal issue with my condition. Everyone who needs to know does, and it's never a show-stopper for anything essential in my life.
I do sincerely thank you for your sympathy/empathy, but it's not something I actually need. I've learned to live with and around dyslexia a long time ago, rather similar to how somebody with a physical handicap since birth no doubt would.
I honestly would not be surprised if it's a complex condition indeed. I would be even less surprised if different conditions ended up being classified under the same moniker, just because they share superficial symptoms (for this is how our healthcare systems function, especially for most mind related topics). I'm not having any issue with that either.
However, what pisses me off, is when people claim to have a solution that just isn't. I don't think it's just me. I know (quite) a few more people with dyslexia, but I don't recall any of them ever having any significant benefit from any of these "special" fonts (beyond comparing them to fonts that probably would confuse most "ordinary" people too).
I would honestly like to hear from other people with dyslexia, if there is even a single one among them that had a real significant benefit from any of these fonts. Because so far, I have never met one.
I again would like to stress that these efforts may nonetheless be pursued with nothing but good intentions. Still, as the saying goes ... the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Only to illustrate the principle, but certainly not to imply that the effects are even remote comparable: the colonial missionaries who came to "spread religion and culture" to the "savages in the new worlds", did often have sincere intentions (yet extremely misguided and wrong on so many levels, as most sane people today will instantly agree with). Even though the example is extreme, I hope it helps to understand why I have an issue with "doing good" for the wrong reasons in general. It has a remarkable habit of ending up more harmful than good.
One of my family members has dyslexia and this font changed their life.
But it helps me to read more correct.
I plan to use it for proof reading for the next larger text I will soon have to write.
As I haven't used it much it's just a guess, but I estimate it will majorly help me with proof reading texts I had written.
We experimented with heaps of different fonts, colours, sizes, and OpenDyslexic is the one thing that worked the dyslexic in our family. It has significantly changed our lives for the better.
You’re doing people a huge disservice by dismissing it out of hand or sprouting some bullshit about children’s preferences. It costs literally nothing to try out - you just have to visit the web page ffs - and it either works or it doesn’t, but if it works it can be life changing.
> In two experiments, the claim was tested that the font “Dyslexie”, specifically designed for people with dyslexia, eases reading performance of children with (and without) dyslexia. Three questions were investigated. (1) Does the Dyslexie font lead to faster and/or more accurate reading? (2) Do children have a preference for the Dyslexie font? And, (3) is font preference related to reading performance? In Experiment 1, children with dyslexia (n = 170) did not read text written in Dyslexie font faster or more accurately than in Arial font. The majority preferred reading in Arial and preference was not related to reading performance. In Experiment 2, children with (n = 102) and without dyslexia (n = 45) read word lists in three different font types (Dyslexie, Arial, Times New Roman). Words written in Dyslexie font were not read faster or more accurately. Moreover, participants showed a preference for the fonts Arial and Times New Roman rather than Dyslexie, and again, preference was not related to reading performance. These experiments clearly justify the conclusion that the Dyslexie font neither benefits nor impedes the reading process of children with and without dyslexia.
It is not some bullshit about children's preferences, it's a pretty reasonable way to evaluate a font in a more objective setting.
The study used word lists vs. prose. I'm no expert, but that limits a reader's abilities for pattern recognition. Also, the age and reading experience of the reader may have bearing on the potential benefits. This just looked at children (otherwise unspecified).
To me, the interesting finding there is that preference does not correlate to speed or accuracy for the given task. It might be that even kids just pick the one they think is prettier and that even with kids most folks "like" clean-lined sans-serif.
I know design folks say that sans-serif are good for signs, titles, etc. (which would apply to bear words) and serif are better for prose. I have no idea if there's good data to back that up, though.
https://bigelowandholmes.typepad.com/bigelow-holmes/2014/11/...
https://www.truthorfiction.com/dyslexie-font/
This study looked at OpenDyslexic, and found subjects preferred Verdana and Arial:
http://dyslexiahelp.umich.edu/sites/default/files/good_fonts...
Whether sans serif or serif fonts are more legible remains contested:
http://alexpoole.info/blog/which-are-more-legible-serif-or-s...
- dyslexia is a condition, not a disease. The underlying problem is not well understood and there are probably multiple causes. The study groups all children together as if they are identical.
- the font is successful if any child benefits from it, not if a majority or average benefit. This kind of flaw seems prevalent in many studies. If it makes reading faster for some children then it’s a benefit. It doesn’t matter if it doesn’t work for everyone.
- it doesn’t look like these tests were reading-out-loud tests, which is specifically where we have seen the most improvement. In my experience OpenDyslexic improved reading out loud which lead to improved silent reading and significantly improved comprehension over a period of weeks. The important thing here is that dyslexic children use coping mechanisms such as skimming to give the appearance of being able to read like their peers (at least this was this case for us).
Given my own personal experience in which OpenDyslexic (not Dyslexie) has been life changing for my family, the study appears to be bullshit. While I haven’t examined the study in detail, it is not clear that the findings justify the very strong claims that it makes.
1: https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/beeline-reader/ifj...
Much easier to read than Comic Sans.
That page was incredible difficult for me to read.
I actually started and stopped about 10 times because it was so..... disorienting, it almost had me dizzy, and it caused me to jump around on the page.
Wonder if there's something I'm doing wrong.
https://opendyslexic.org/ without the "www" works better.
Granted that I'm not dyslexic: this version seems way more difficult to read, other than looking bad :(
I'm very minimal reading dyslexic (it's a bit complex).
Anyway while it doesn't fell like it would allow me to read faster, I believe it does help me to read more correct. Through I have to test it out more. I thing I will try it the next time I write a paper or similar. Also it's very different to many other font's so maybe it's just about getting used to it?
I'll have to try this out.
I think it's great to read, but agree that it isn't the best-looking font. Not as bad as comic sans though.
Probably this font forces us to read letter by letter, and this is what makes it easier for dyslexic people to read the text (they don't get confused too much of the next / previous characters), and so difficult for people who aren't used to read letter by letter.
Interesting :)
[0]: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Typoglycemia
The it's dubious argument seems compelling but I still tend towards the it helps belief probably just because I have spent some time thinking the first argument was true and the second argument has not yet managed to win through that habit.
2012 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4544997
2016 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11804492
There is a whitepaper about two research for ones who want to go deeper.
I've talked to many dyslexics who use it and they say it works really well for them, much better than anything they could find.
[disclaimer] I work with the team behind both the Omotype and Omoguru. Would be happy to provide any further info on both.
I think it’s also important to note that, unlike OpenDyslexic, Dislexie and Omotype are not freely licensed.
OmoType is free for personal use.
I see. I missed that.
> OmoType is free for personal use.
By “freely licensed” I was referring to free as in freedom.
On that note, where can I download OmoType? I see I can download software that uses OmoType, but I can’t seem to find where to download the font itself.
The bottom half of the letters are a bit fatter which makes it easier in my head to read. I have no idea what's the science behind this. It's makes it easier for me to read a bit longer without getting sick of reading.
Not sure if it's faster than other fonts but it reads more relaxed.
However on this www page you don't see the font go to: https://opendyslexic.org/
Apps should generally have the ability to allow for custom fonts so dyslexic users can customise them and use their favourite font.
On the topic of fonts, my favourite new learning 'enhancing' font is Sans Forgetica [1] – it's been proven to help you retain and memorise text. Pretty cool.
[1]: https://sansforgetica.rmit/
I'm not dyslexic but sometimes it is hard for me to focus on long texts, I keep skipping words and going back and forth... although I can read quite fast sometimes I read a word for another, when I was a kid it took me quite some time to correctly visualize that "already" is written like that and not "aldeary" and the same thing for a small number of other words. (thanks Baldur's Gate, thanks Ocarina of Time)
When I first opened the site with www it simply felt like a normal sans-serif font (as it was), after reading luisroy comment I changed to the site without www and I must say that it is way easier to read... don't know if it's the spacing or something else, or maybe I'm dyslexic, who knows...
Interesting though :)
Sounds like mild dyslexic symptoms. Have you tried reading with one eye closed? It could be mild convergence issues.
Anyway I have that "eye skipping" thing not just during reading but also in average life situations, when talking to someone I keep changing focus: eyes, mouth, nose, hands, cheeks, right eye, left hand, dog on the background, etc.
If I stare at something trying to keep the focus one of two things happen:
- I loose myself in thoughts
- My eyes get tired and I must stop staring
I can now enjoy any book while before I would sometimes buy a book but never manage to read it correctly since the font would throw me off.
I can only applaud the initiative but I can get that its not for every person with dyslexia.
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/opendyslexic-font-...
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24049630
This is all super anecdotal, but I've lost countless hours debugging stuff, only to find that ive called fidnAllDocs instead of findAllDocs. Even when looking for a typo in that specific variable, I'll miss it multiple times.
A while back I switched to open dyslexic in my terminal and editor. This issue has gone from every couple weeks to practically never.
Some people hate it, but it's definitely worth a shot
I do in fact see an OpenDyslexicMono font after downloading it. I can't vouch for how good the font is though, since I'm not dyslexic.
I feel your pain on this. I'm curious to see if other people find it helps. My instinct is that its much harder to read compared to something like zilvertype. But then I _had_ dysgraphia, rather than full bore dyslexia.
That font also looks like the top of the line has been rubbed off, making things far worse as the top of the text has cues to recognise words. I believe that's my issue with caps as it makes words hard to read as I see blocks of letters, not words.
The biggest change I make the text easier to read is to increase the font size a couple of points or zoom in a little (ctrl + mouse wheel/ +-). Right now hacker news is at 150% zoom (snapped to the left side of a 43" 4K monitor).
Also, I prefer not use windows scaling as it wastes a lot of pixels with bigger menu bars (my eyesight is fine). One more thing... I'm very particular about the screen brightness (there's an app called clickMonitorDDC that let's you change screen brightness from mouse wheel or keyboard (crtl+shift+ up/ down)), and blue light filter at night. I find I can focus better in the evening/ night but I believe that's more of an ADHD thing.
Obviously its not going to be the next zilvertype. That to one side, I am curious to hear from people to see if it helps.
I pretty sure this is the basis of why serif fonts aren't as readable on computer displays, the serifs add more noise rather than help.