On Jan 4, 2013, at 8:41 PM, Matthew Flaschen <mflaschen(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
On 01/04/2013 02:37 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
There is a collection of good reasons objecting
to this decision at
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Wikimedia_Foundation_Design/Typography#…
- can someone answer, please?
I will be having a presentation in 4 weeks at FOSDEM and I want to take
our design guidelines as inspiration for that slide deck. I don't know
what fonts will be used but I can assure you Arial or any proprietary
font won't be there. Any suggestions? We have the community driven fonts
in Linux desktops spiced up by the work done by Canonical, Google and
even Adobe recently.
I do agree it's important that Wikimedia sites to render well in free
fonts. However, it's important to note that Liberation Sans
(
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberation_fonts), a completely free
font, is metrically compatible with Arial, and often on GNU/Linux the
name Arial automatically uses Liberation Sans.
However, if we go with Arial, it would be worth specifying that Arial
should be immediately followed by Liberation Sans (and perhaps one or
two other free fonts) for systems without such a mapping.
Matt Flaschen
Why not the other way around?
font-family: "Liberation Sans", Arial;
-- Krinkle