https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=69998
--- Comment #12 from Isarra <[email protected]> --- (In reply to Jon from comment #10) > Isarra I personally see nothing wrong in that screenshot. > > There is nothing that says an h3 need to be a stronger font weight than h2. > > I can tell the h2 is more important than the h3 as: > * it has an underline > * it has a bigger font size > * it has larger line height/margins Aye, by itself the weight difference is by no means a major issue. The underline and margins on the h2 do effectively indicate that it's supposed to be more important, but even so, the h3s are... strange. Due to the bolding and font differences effective weight of the h3s is significantly higher than the h2s, and why? It looks strange, and there's really no good reason for this. So why not make it better? That's all this is about. For a bit of history, this issue has actually been present in monobook since its release, with vector merely inheriting the header styles from that. The typography refresh may have made it stand out more (especially on some platforms) due to the different fonts, however: serif fonts tend to be a lot lighter in general than sans-serif, which is also part of why they've historically been regarded as so bad for screen use, and the different fonts in the serif stack also have quite a bit of variation in their own sizes, which can make the effect even more pronounced depending on which gets used. But that just means the serif stack should be applied to all the headers so it doesn't matter, that's all. Beyond that the fix is still pretty much exactly the same here as it would be for monobook. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug. You are on the CC list for the bug. _______________________________________________ Wikibugs-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
