On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 1:32 PM, Brandon Harris <bharris(a)wikimedia.org>wrote;wrote:
Let's not start the font discussion
again.
For now, we're sticking with plain old Serif. The document is out
of date in that regard.
If that's the case, it's the first I've heard of it... The PDF and
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_Design/Typography need
to be updated if that's the new consensus out of the design team.
Jan: for reference, the way that kind of font stack works is that it would
only specify certain fonts for the users that already have them installed
on their system, using font families and a
fallback<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_typography#Fallback_fonts>…t;list.
It would
*never* deliver a new proprietary font to a user, such as through Web
fonts<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_typography#Web_fonts>importing
of typefaces. Each user would see slightly different but similar
typefaces depending on what their system has, which is why the "Wikimedia
Foundation Design/Typography" page describes a list of fonts that include
core fonts for Windows, Linux, and OSX.
--
Steven Walling,
Product Manager
https://wikimediafoundation.org/