On 27-10-2013 02:19, Brandon Harris wrote:
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,