On 2013-10-29 4:25 PM, Matthew Flaschen wrote: > On 10/29/2013 07:14 PM, Daniel Friesen wrote: >>> The extremely few users who manually customize their font-matching can >>> still override e.g. what "Nimbus Sans L" points to on their machine. >> You're basically suggesting that users who have customized their >> browsers/OS to handle the patterns used on the majority of the internet >> – many who may have done a C&P from a tutorial and actually know nothing >> about the config itself – re-customize their browser/OS to support one >> website/organization. > > Do you really think a significant number of users have manually > customized (even by copy-and-pasting commands) the font-matching on > their machine? > > I think that is a small minority, much less even than those who > customized their browser's serif or sans-serif fonts (itself small in > relative terms). > > Matt Flaschen I might agree if there were some tangible benefit to breaking things for those few users. But the only rationale so far for practically breaking visual improvements which even a few readers may have done by explicitly naming open fonts is some vague sense of FOSS idealism that dosen't provide a single practical improvement for any reader since it doesn't actually change the fonts used by the default OS config readers use.
It basically harasses FOSS users with local customizations to do something that doesn't provide any benefits for other FOSS users. I see nothing but a net loss. ~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/] _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
