Loading the Autonym stack was a solution to a much worse problem. When it
is still a problem, it can easily be disabled because having the Autonym
font is not essential. It is there to make things look good.
Having the OpenDyslexic font is essential.
Having the fonts for Hindi, Divehi, Tamil, Amharic is essential.
OpenDyslexic is easily the most used WebFont. It has the potential to serve
7% of a population.
When you indicate that the feelings are still high, you have to appreciate
that no recent changes lead to the disabling of primary functionality.
There may have been performance issues but they were there before. The
argument was not made that in order to save our infrastructure ULS had to
be disabled. The argument that was made was we want to improve the
performance of our site.
I do agree that this is important. It is not as important as providing
ability to read and edit. I do agree that delivering web fonts is not
trivial. However the non technical arguments have been trivialised.
On 16 February 2014 10:48, Steven Walling <steven.walling(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 1:16 AM, David Gerard
On 16 February 2014 08:54, Gerard Meijssen
Working towards a more beautiful viewing
experience is a secondary
objective. Primary is that our readers and editors can read and edit.
ULS is a huge success in doing what it was intended to do. I am afraid
we have lost sight of what our primary objective
Indeed. What precisely was the problem with ULS?
Language Selector has been disabled on 21-01-2014 to work out some
performance issues that had affected the Wikimedia sites." To my
understanding part of the major performance issues here related to issues
like loading the Autonym font via webfonts.
I probably should not have brought up ULS because feelings are still raw
about it and I'm not interested in rehashing its problems, but my point is
that it's an example of how delivering webfonts is not a trivial thing for
us. No one has offered to spend time on a highly performant webfonts system
that can deliver better typography reliably to all Wikimedia sites, and
we're certainly not going to officially task a team to do so when there's a
reasonable alternative that thousands of users are trying out right now in
did the designers give to non-Latin?
The beta feature has involved lots of testing in non-Latin scripts. It's
not perfect yet but we certainly haven't ignored scripts that represent so
many users. (Remember we're not talking about something actually that new.
A very similar font stack has been in use for 100% of mobile users for more
than a year.)
P.S. Sorry for answering from a different account. My work address is not
subscribed to Wikitech.
Wikitech-l mailing list