On 27-10-2013 02:19, Brandon Harris wrote:
rgree++
While I see the value in specifying font stacks that are arguably “prettier” I also don’t think it’s worth giving up our principles for it.
<sarcasm> If that principle means that we try to avoid anything non-free, then we should simply block access to Wikipedia for all Windows and Mac users. Death to all non-FOS software! </sarcasm>
No, but really. The majority of our readers and editors are 'stuck' with propriatery, non-free operating systems and their fonts. I cannot see any benefit in applying the 'free' priciple here. It would severely restrict our freedom in design. Typography in web design is important enough not to restrict itself in some idealogical principle.
The last thing I want to see is a message box stating "To see this site as intended, DOWNLOAD THIS FREE FONT FIRST". Even though I already have a truckload of free fonts installed, I prefer to use the system's fonts simply because they render way better then some free fonts. The FreeSans/FreeSerif/FreeMono fonts render particularly bad on Windows.
And since we're sharing links... I also have a (non-finished) essay on typography where you can see the most prevalant system and open fonts together at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:TYPO.
Met vriendelijke groet,