line spacing on mailing labels too tight

[ericding]

I realize this could also fall under "enhancement request" rather than bug, but just to get it down somewhere I report it here. First: thanks for DM! What a useful and well-designed program (then again, I am a software engineer by training, so "design" may just mean it's useful for geeks!).

Now, the issue: when I create mailing labels with DM, I've noticed that the line spacing is rather tight. Hanging letters (g, y, etc.) run very close to the line below. Can DM space the lines out a wee bit more generously, or perhaps have a user-setting preference for this attribute? Thanks!

[jmuehleisen]

Dear Eric,

Thanks for the kind comments.

One the mailing labels question, which label layout are you using, and what font are you using.

One of the problems here is that most people use the 3 across, 10 up label which is less than 1 inch tall. 6 lines of data (potentially) and things have to be pretty tight!

I've found that Tahoma 9 seems to work pretty well.

I'll dig around in Fox's label routines and see if I can allow the line height setting to be tweakable or not.

[ericding]

I'm tried 11-12 point fonts; 9 pt fonts seem a little small for the main address, and we don't typically have more than 4 lines in our outgoing addresses. I'm using the 5160 layout, as you mentioned (3x10); why squeeze the lines together if there aren't actually six lines to display? Thanks.

[jmuehleisen]

Well, you asked a good question:

"Why squeeze the lines together if there aren't actually six lines to print?"

The thing is, the program just can't dynamically adjust the line spacing depending on how many lines of data there are. Man, that would be great if it would do that, wouldn't it.

I think your best bet is to go with a custom label solution in Word. Actually, that's what I do, because I like to "bold" the name on the address line. But, I do get into trouble when I get into those 6 address line addresses!

[ericding]

Thanks John. If it can't be (easily) done, then c'est la vie. Thanks for the quick responses!