Comment by fprog
3 years ago
A shame they didn’t opt for Public Sans, which was designed by the US Web Design System team. Though I see it only supports Latin characters at the moment, which might make it unsuitable for use at State.
3 years ago
A shame they didn’t opt for Public Sans, which was designed by the US Web Design System team. Though I see it only supports Latin characters at the moment, which might make it unsuitable for use at State.
I believe that font is primarily intended for interfaces rather than documents. The design decisions are quite different between those contexts, or that's what I've heard.
I wonder "how many fonts we need". Is there a good, open resource for FOSS fonts, to compare them, and preferably a curation?
I agree with others on here, though. Everything our government does, and produces, from an IT/development perspective which is not a "competitive advantage" (security, etc.) should be open. Why there would be an official directive to choose a non-open font when so many open fonts exist, is beyond me.
political signal by MSFT corporate to the US citizen, we will license you the type you read each day; pay here.
Extended Latin, including Polish, Vietnamese, etc. Useful enough. Thanks for sharing :)
Serif'd fonts are easier to read.
Per TFA they picked a sans font (Calibri) under the mistaken impression that sans serif fonts are easier to read.
Maybe sans fonts are easier to read through hipster glasses.
The tweet underneath mentioned OCR.