Font problems in Concise Oxford Dictionary

If I use the default font (which I don't like for reading) then the bullet points in Oxford Dict are square boxes and I cant make sense of the pronunciation. If I change to Times New Roman (which I prefer for reading) then the bullet points are correct but half of the text of the pronunciation are square boxes.

Either way I cant read the pronunciations

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Mark Smith

John,

I can't reproduce your troubles. Here is what I get with the default font:

Here is what I get with Times New Roman:

What operating system are you using?

BTW: The pronunciation 'spellings' are explained in a section at the beginning of this work:

John Hapgood

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90675#Comment_90675

John,

I can't reproduce your troubles. . . .

What operating system are you using?

BTW: The pronunciation 'spellings' are explained in a section at the beginning of this work:

I'm using Windows XP 3 and my Times New Roman Font is 400K dated 7-17-04

I wonder if there's a newer version of this font?

Todd Phillips

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90684#Comment_90684

John,

I can't reproduce your troubles. . . .

What operating system are you using?

BTW: The pronunciation 'spellings' are explained in a section at the beginning of this work:

I'm using Windows XP 3 and my Times New Roman Font is 400K dated 7-17-04

I wonder if there's a newer version of this font?

John, I have the same problem in XP SP3.

Jacob Hantla

same problem

Mark Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90684#Comment_90684

I wonder if there's a newer version of this font?

I am running Windows 7. My Times New Roman font is dated 7/13/09 and is 817 KB. I suspect that the default font is also older in XP and that accounts for the difference noted.

John Hapgood

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90716#Comment_90716

I wonder if there's a newer version of this font?

I am running Windows 7. My Times New Roman font is dated 7/13/09 and is 817 KB. I suspect that the default font is also older in XP and that accounts for the difference noted.

Thanks Mark, I reported the problem and referred to this forum topic in the slight chance they do not already know about it.

TCBlack

I have the same problem with the font: Calibri, but the default font works.

John Hapgood

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/90816#Comment_90816

I noticed that if you have visual cues turned on and you put the mouse on the visual cue in the scrool bar, the pop-up window uses a SanSerif font which shows the correct text/fonts. It's a good temporary work around if you need to see them.

Ebbe Andréasson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/94278#Comment_94278

This is an known XP issue. Bradley has a tip:

http://community.logos.com/forums/p/7514/60685.aspx#60685

Scroll down to Bradleys post at Dec 21.

This is what I get with Bradleys settings running XP:

John Hapgood

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/94517#Comment_94517

This is an known XP issue. Bradley has a tip:

http://community.logos.com/forums/p/7514/60685.aspx#60685

Scroll down to Bradleys post at Dec 21.

This is what I get with Bradleys settings running XP:

I tried Bradliey's settings and it made no difference. Are you using Times New Roman as your default font like I'm doing.

Ebbe Andréasson

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/94574#Comment_94574

Are you using Times New Roman as your default font like I'm doing.

No. Using Times New Roman I have your problem. Sorry, I was to fast replying.

Mark E. Ryman

I'm using Garamond so I get a more book-like read. It gives me a lot of boxes with Xs in the box. I'll give it a try with other fonts. I'm running Vista.

Mark E. Ryman

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95551#Comment_95551

Switching to a different font until I found something that took away the
X-boxes was the answer. Of those fonts I have loaded, these work: Arial, Cardo, Gentium, Tahoma, and Times New Roman.

None of them are aesthetically appealing and each inhibits reading in one sense or another.

Mike Aubrey

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95948#Comment_95948

Switching to a different font until I found something that took away the
X-boxes was the answer. Of those fonts I have loaded, these work: Arial, Cardo, Gentium, Tahoma, and Times New Roman.

None of them are aesthetically appealing and each inhibits reading in one sense or another.

No font covers enough of Unicode to deal with every single character. And typically, most book-ish feeling ones aren't going to go very far beyond basic Roman script.

John Hapgood

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/95954#Comment_95954

None of them are aesthetically appealing and each inhibits reading in one sense or another.

No font covers enough of Unicode to deal with every single character. And typically, most book-ish feeling ones aren't going to go very far beyond basic Roman script.

Your right! TITUS Cyberbit Basic almost does it except that it has a paragraph line spacing of 1-1/2 otherwise it would have been perfect. It looks just like Times New Roman. I wonder why they made it with that line spacing?