On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 8:13 PM, Erik Moeller <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 8, 2014 at 10:59 AM, Martijn Hoekstra > <[email protected]> wrote: > > So, the font stack changes with regards to the status quo now change > > nothing for Windows users, changes Helvetica -> Helvetica neue for Mac > > users and changes Arial, DejaVu Sans or Arimo for possibly something > else, > > amongst which Nimbus Sans L, maybe, maybe not. > > Actually, it's a bit more complicated. All users get serif fonts for > headings, which they didn't before and which is probably the biggest > visual before/after difference. The serif fonts still prioritize > free/libre fonts over non-free ones. > > The body fonts prioritized free/libre fonts on deployments, but for > Windows users without ClearType/anti-aliasing, those render very > poorly, so they were disabled shortly after deployment. This is now > causing people to be upset because the initial agreement to never > prioritize non-free fonts is no longer maintained for the body. > > Odder's patch would revert to sans-serif as a generic classification > for the body, but doesn't touch the font specification for the headers > (yet). The commit summary is a bit misleading in that regard. > Yes, I should have made that clear: I do very much support the Odder patch[1] ( https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/124475/ ) that reverts body to sans serif and keeps @content-heading-font-family: "Linux Libertine", Georgia, Times, serif; That is not the status quo, but the diff between the Odder patch and the typography refresh basically is the "Set a non-free font stack to give Mac now Helvetica Neue rather than Helvetica", with a -2 is planted in the ground before as a demarcation line. That's the point that I don't think is worth having a non-free font-stack for, and that I certainly think standing your ground for the brave new world of typography refresh is constructive for. [1]My only nitpick about it is that I'm wondering what Times is doing in that stack. I can't think of any situation where a user wouldn't have Linux Libertine or Georgia, but does have Times, yet doesn't have it as its default serif font. When one has specifically set a default serif different from Times, you probably have a good reason for it - or at least a better reason than the websites desire for Times, and we should respect that. Yet this beef is very small compared to all other issues in this thread. > > There's some additional discussion about Georgia as a font choice due > to its use of text figures (AKA old-style numerals), which some people > find look odd in headings with numbers, especially in non-Latin > scripts where old-style numerals may not be commonly encountered. Due > to this, some are arguing for also changing the style for headings to > serif (_not_ sans-serif) as a generic classification, or removing > Georgia from the stack. That particular issue hasn't been discussed in > detail yet, as far as I can see. > > I think the differences of opinion here are not worth a holy war. > Prioritizing a non-free font before free ones for the _body_ with a > clear FIXME indicating that this is not a desirable state is IMO only > marginally different from reverting to sans-serif until we have a > free/libre font that _can_ be prioritized for the body. So I think > either outcome should be OK for the short term, and we should focus on > the longer term question of a good font stack for the body that > prioritizes free/libre fonts. > > Let's not polarize each other too much. All the arguments I've heard > have been fundamentally reasonable and rational, not just "Change is > evil". Some people hate the serifs per se, but that's a smaller > discussion compared to these conversations, which are about > substantial things that can be reasoned about. > > Erik > -- > Erik Möller > VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation > > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
