On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 6:14 PM, Ryan Kaldari <rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
One number covering all three.
One thing I wonder about is the difference in style score for Arimo (5) and
Liberation Sans (10). Apparently the only difference between the two is the
Something this subjective could probably do with a much more diverse sample.
Do you mean a more diverse sample of fonts, a more diverse sample of text,
or a more diverse sample of evaluators?
You can see a sample from the technical tests in the
file attached to this
Sorry I don't have more documentation for that.
In some local testing, it seems that Liberation Sans (1.07.3) isn't
actually being used for any of the diacritics on
[[en:User:Kaldari/Font_test]]. If I change the font-family to "'Liberation
Sans', 'Unicode BMP Fallback SIL', 'sans-serif'" and preview I
characters on top of all the 'g's.
OTOH, Liberation Sans with DejaVu Sans as a fallback (default sans-serif on
my system) does better than your screenshot. Oddly, using Arimo as a
fallback doesn't work very well.
I haven't tested on different backends yet, but
that's what part of what I
was talking with Rob about today. Apparently the font hinting can cause
significantly different rendering quality on different operating systems.
Any help assessing this would be appreciated.
If you tell me what exactly you want screenshots of, I can make screenshots
for all the fonts on your list except Helvetica and Helvetica Neue with
Debian's font renderer, in Firefox (really Iceweasel) and Chromium.
Brad Jorsch (Anomie)