Since fonts are licensed by the user rather than the distributor of the
software, I don't really see a strong ideological argument for only
specifying free-license fonts. MediaWiki explicitly supports Internet
Explorer, for example, which isn't open source. We also have an iOS mobile
app. In some cases we simply have to live with the realities of what our
users are using (which unfortunately isn't always open source). That said,
my personal preference would be for us to keep our font neutrality and not
declare anything other than 'serif' and 'sans-serif', but I'm open to
listening to other people's arguments.
On Sat, Oct 26, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) <bjorsch(a)wikimedia.org
I came across Gerrit change 79948 today, which
use a pile of non-free fonts (with one free font thrown in at the end
as a sop). Is this really the direction we want to go, considering
that in many other areas we prefer to use free software whenever we
Looking around a bit, I see this has been discussed in some "back
corners" (no offense intended), but not on this list and I don't
see any place where free versus non-free was actually discussed rather
than being brought up and then seemingly ignored.
In case it helps, I did some searching through mediawiki/core and
WMF-deployed extensions for font-family directives containing non-free
fonts. The results are at
non-staff account intentional).
Wikitech-l mailing list