I think you're missing what Issara and others like myself have
suggested: just reverting the fontstack part, not the
font-size/color/etc that are a part of the changeset.
<quote name="Steven Walling" date="2014-04-07" time="15:41:02
On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Isarra Yos
5) Restore the status quo - specifying
'sans-serif' as the font, which
translates to the default font for the platform, had none of these
problems, and resulted in fonts for all platforms which were good for those
platforms (though perhaps not necessarily the best).
We're not going to do this.
The idea that one bug requires a complete revert and even more disruption
for users is pretty absurd. Do we revert deployment of an extension every
time a bug occurs? No. We do it when the disruption caused by keeping the
new version is greater than taking it away again. This is not one of those
We made the last change, which includes vital improvements besides slightly
altered body copy font family, after months of testing and prep. But all
new software has bugs, even "simple" LESS-only changes when they have a
scope this wide. The latest patch by Jon was a bug fix, but that doesn't
mean we're going to cause further disruption for users by completely
reverting back to the old defaults.
What we're going to do is discuss the options Jon laid out for trying to
promote free fonts in our stack, while also being practical and retaining
the enhancements that most users have been delivered so far. This is why we
iterate on changes in any realm of design and development.
I'll also nudge us here to remember that we cannot make design decisions
like this in a vacuum, without feedback from non-technical users. It wasn't
perfect, but we've been working hard to do that as part of Typography
Refresh. Jon's latest bug fix itself is based on reports from many users.
So far they've been thankful we did this.
Wikitech-l mailing list
| Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E |
| identi.ca: @greg A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |