Typography / Research draft

Typeface comparisons and passenger tasks

The typography study records the application and exact font revision before comparing specimens. It examines visible size, layout and writing-system coverage, with original font subsets prepared for further testing.

Selected findings

Version and application

The documentary cases distinguish sign-specific cuts, screens and matrix displays. A family name alone does not identify the exact application or file revision.

Comparison conditions

Equal point size can produce different visible letter heights. A layout change can also affect an outcome attributed to a typeface.

Checks across writing systems

Character coverage, shaping, regional forms and fluent-reader performance are separate checks. The research subsets have limited coverage.

From evidence to design

OTI proposals

An exact lowercase a from the original Passage Research A font is enlarged beside an outline of the same glyph and restrained construction rules. It is a research specimen, not a legibility ranking or a replacement for Public Sans. — Passage Research A lowercase a, shown filled and outlined from the same glyph. The font is a research subset; Public Sans remains OTI's communications typeface.

An application record

Record task, language, script, medium, dimensions, font revision, rights and review evidence.

Resources for each writing system

Preserve authorised names and coordinate suitable script resources. Public Sans remains the interface typeface.

Comparative research specimens

Use the editable Passage Research and Matrix subsets in comparisons with existing baselines. No passenger-effectiveness winner has been established.