<quote name="Steven Walling" date="2014-03-10" time="16:19:04
+0000">
But who will we possibly be promoting non-free fonts to? End users, who
already bought and paid for them? Developers, who should know how CSS works?
You're not demonstrating real harm here. We rely on free software for
MediaWiki/Wikimedia because we must. Because otherwise we can't fulfill our
mission. How does this, in the short or long run, demonstrably impair our
ability to fulfill our mission?
The harm is promoting a nonFree font in our CSS. Full stop. It's that simple.
...that only
benefits Apple OS users.
Let's be clear on that point, please.
That is not true at all. Again, you're completely ignoring almost the
entirety of the typography refresh except for this one line of CSS,
including the fact that it means that our mobile and desktop interfaces
will have a single consistent reading experience. As you said, "I haven't
sat down and really studied the difference" between the beta feature and
the current settings.
As I said in a previous email, those are great changes and I bet their
useful and (I'll continue with) they should probably be pushed out
regardless of the font stack question. Separate the nonFree font part
from the other changes and I bet there'd be a lot less push back.
Unless, of course, those other choices were made under the assumption
that the font is Helvetica Neue, which it won't be for the majority of
our users, no matter the CSS rules.
Greg
--
| Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
| identi.ca: @greg A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |