https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=172824
--- Comment #15 from V Stuart Foote <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from comment #14) > I disapprove. > > (In reply to Mr Beedell, Roke Julian Lockhart from comment #0) > > As aforestated, “Considering that AOSP (SDK ⋛ 35), > > That's: > > 1. A Google-controlled environment, > 2. for mobile phones and tablets > > > and all desktop Linux distributions, utilise Noto Sans by default > > 1. That's just false. Unless I've misunderstood your claim. > 2. I assume you meant Noto Serif for Writer, Noto Sans for Calc, Impress and > Draw. > > > why does LO utilise Liberation, rather than Noto? > > It doesn't utilize Liberation except for 'Western' scripts; and even that is > just because we currently don't support per-script fonts (see bug 151215 and > others). > > > I ask because Noto covers effectively every code-point, > > whereas Liberation does not." [^1] > > That may be, be that doesn't mean it covers them _well_. In Hebrew, for > example, Noto Serif is a poor typeface (IMNSHO), and is weirdly shaped and > self-misaligned. We (= Hebrew speakers) have actually undergone a process > for selecting a body + header typefaces, and the result seems to be > well-received. Nobody even suggested Noto Serif as an option. > > In Arabic, Noto Serif doesn't even exist. And Noto Sans Arabic I wouldn't > like as the default font - although native Arabic & Persian users' opinion > should carry more weight than mine on this. Believe that is intentional, rather the font is designated "Noto Naskh Arabic" (traditional) as counter point to Noto Sans (modern), with appropriate stroke weight modulation. And it is a font that LibreOffice already bundles. The only question is its order placemen on the VCL.xcu list sequence for the ar-* locales--many still fixed at Tahoma hold over from Office 97. > ... > > Finally - I also weakly-oppose because this font is associated with Google. > Symbolically, I believe that is an association we should avoid. But like I > said, that is a weak objection in itself. Google as an open source font foundry released their offerings under the SIL Open Font License 1.1, migrating them from APL as OFL was being implemented. To our benefit with the Liberation v.2 fonts, and later the CrosExtra equivalents to MS, Carlito for Calibri (sans) and Caladea for Cambria (serif). I see no reason to shy away from using the Noto superfamily, we already make use of Google's contribution to Liberation and the CrOS Extra fonts. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
