Adam Borowski wrote, > What I'm thinking, is that a beautiful font that covers Russian, Ukrainian, > Serbian, Kazakh, Mongolian cyr, etc., should be recommended to users before > one whose only grace is including every single codepoint.
https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/opentype/spec/chapter2#scripts-and-languages If there's any language tag in addition to 'dflt' (default) under a particular script, the font is likely to be more expert in its development. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and both fancy and utilitarian typefaces can be typographically elegant.
