On 03/08/2014 05:02 PM, Steven Walling wrote:
ignoring all of the other changes in the typography
update.
Steven, I have nothing remarkable to say about the typography update as
a whole. I will not pretend knowing better than anybody involved in that
project.
I have been consistently opposed to the specification of any proprietary
fonts in anything related with Wikimedia and MediaWiki, and I was
replying to a message in a thread about "Font stack", started by Isarra
asking why we need to define anything else than "sans-serif".
the entirely irrational dislike of referring to a font
that is not FOSS.
This is superficial
I have done my best trying to explain why this opposition is not
bikeshedding, is not irrational, and is not superficial. See my points at
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/design/2013-December/001285.html
http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2014-February/074633.html
Since I didn't succeed getting any reply on the matter of principles, I
decided to move to the practical test I referred to in my previous email.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Typography_refresh/Font_choice/Test
The hypothesis is that the goals of the typography refresh can be
achieved better without specifying any proprietary font. I don't think
this discussion is an attack to the typography refresh project. I also
respect your work, and your time.
--
Quim Gil
Technical Contributor Coordinator @ Wikimedia Foundation
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil