On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Ryan Kaldari <[email protected]> wrote:
> I spent most of Friday working on font evaluation with the designers. [...] > given a "style" score based on readability, neutrality, and "authority" > (does the font look like it conveys reliable information). What does "neutrality" mean in the context of a font? I'm having trouble figuring out what "authority" might actually mean besides "Does this seem familiar to me from sites I use for reference?". Did they actually rate these separately, or was it just one number covering all three? Something this subjective could probably do with a much more diverse sample. Next, I did a blind technical evaluation. For this, I used each of the 10 > fonts to render combining diacritics, ties, and other "obscure" Unicode > features. Then I gave each font a score based on how many problems it had > rendering the characters. > It seems to me that the technical evaluation doesn't need to be blind, you just look at "is the diacritic/tie/etc correctly positioned?". Are there any details on this technical evaluation? What exactly was tested, and in what ways did the fonts fail? Ideal IMO would be a table of images (or a big image laid out as a table). Were the technical results consistent across backends? -- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
