On Wed, Mar 5, 2014 at 2:51 PM, Max <[email protected]> wrote: > *> If there is a very specific 'right font', why aren't we using it as a > webfont?* > I think webfonts are amazing, and we should definitely use them. However, > even with webfonts using a font stack is a good idea. What if the user has > an old browser that doesn't support webfonts? What if the user chose not to > download font files to save bandwidth? In those cases we still want to do > our best to ensure a decent reading experience, which isn't always possible > with the default fallbacks. > Our font stack would look something like this: > 'Fancy pants Webfont Pro', DejaVu Sans, Arial, sans-serif; >
The answer to "why aren't we using webfonts" is that we're not resourced to implement a homegrown delivery system that scales to Wikimedia-size traffic without a performance hit. Previous webfonts delivery that we've done for localization and accessibility has been rocky on the performance front, and it's not realistic for us right now to implement a system that delivers webfonts for all text to all users. (And we can't rely on TypeKit or Google webfonts system like many other sites). -- Steven Walling, Product Manager https://wikimediafoundation.org/
_______________________________________________ Design mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/design
