Live data from Hacker News

The Interface font family

rsms.me

11–20 of 93 posts

Re: The Interface font family

#11
> Since this font is very similar to Roboto, glyph outlines from Roboto are indeed being used, mainly as "placeholders" while the glyph set is expanded. The Roboto license can be found in the source directory.

Mainly?

If this is a deliberate near-clone of Roboto, then at the very least there should be some explanation of how it differs and why.

Re: The Interface font family

#12
post #8

I'm sure this is like tabs vs spaces for typographists, but why the hell do people make and use sans-serif fonts? Even ignoring aesthetics, the fact that there are horrendous ambiguities (like between I and l) renders these fonts completely inappropriate for computational tasks like copying passwords or secret keys. I have run into this problem multiple times on OS X and iOS, where the password managers use sans seri…

Because in the days of lower resolution screens the commonly accepted (correct) view was that a serif font reduced readability.

With retina/high DPI displays? Not so much.

Re: The Interface font family

#13
post #9

A disproportionate sans serif without any letter spacing. It's free though, so better than nothing. Edit: Dear downvoters, what I am saying is that you can take any ramdom sans serif, reduce the letter-spacing and you end up with a similar looking font face which might be even more balanced. Despite my criticism, I expressed my high appreciation that the creator offers his work for free. If you disagree let me know w…

By "disproportionate", do you mean "badly proportioned", or merely "proportional" as opposed to monospace?

By disproportionate I meant that it feels like a slightly condensed font without really being a condensed font. This paired with this too small letter spacing creates this disproportionate look.

Another poster just commented that it looks like Roboto (or is even based on Roboto) and Roboto faces the same issues but not that worse. Roboto itself is a mutated Helvetica Neue which is admittedly a reference sans serif where every other sans looks inferior amd kind of turned out badly in comparison.

Re: The Interface font family

#14
post #11

> Since this font is very similar to Roboto, glyph outlines from Roboto are indeed being used, mainly as "placeholders" while the glyph set is expanded. The Roboto license can be found in the source directory. Mainly? If this is a deliberate near-clone of Roboto, then at the very least there should be some explanation of how it differs and why.

But this is a good idea. Clone Roboto, change few beziers and you can put your own font on your portofolio/resume.

Re: The Interface font family

#15
post #8

I'm sure this is like tabs vs spaces for typographists, but why the hell do people make and use sans-serif fonts? Even ignoring aesthetics, the fact that there are horrendous ambiguities (like between I and l) renders these fonts completely inappropriate for computational tasks like copying passwords or secret keys. I have run into this problem multiple times on OS X and iOS, where the password managers use sans seri…

I don't want to obsess over the analogy but just want to point out that it's not a typical holy war in the tabs/spaces or vi/emacs sense because no one is claiming that only one of serifs or sans-serif is best. Most acknowledge the benefits of both.

Re: The Interface font family

#16
Looking at Interface's glyph map, I see that letter-O (O) is slightly wider than number-zero (0). Capital-eye (I) is indistinguishable from small-ell (l), though number-one (1) is distinguishable from both.

What other glyph ambiguities do you look out for on new fonts?

Re: The Interface font family

#17
Nice font. Would there be a way for you guys to incorporate the font on a platform like Google's webfonts? For our business (http://fairpixels.pro) we are constantly looking for great fonts to use in the UI work we do for software teams. Having a scattered landscape doesn't help.

Re: The Interface font family

#18

Looking at Interface's glyph map, I see that letter-O (O) is slightly wider than number-zero (0). Capital-eye (I) is indistinguishable from small-ell (l), though number-one (1) is distinguishable from both. What other glyph ambiguities do you look out for on new fonts?

I noticed that as well. Difficult to claim "highly legible" with an oversight like that.

Re: The Interface font family

#20

Looking at Interface's glyph map, I see that letter-O (O) is slightly wider than number-zero (0). Capital-eye (I) is indistinguishable from small-ell (l), though number-one (1) is distinguishable from both. What other glyph ambiguities do you look out for on new fonts?

Slashed 0 and Ø in nordic countries.

Though not abiguous in sharing the exact same shapes, many characters can share similar structures that (arguably; citation needed) can cause visual confusion. For example;

3 and 8 in a typeface like Helvetica are very similar. Opening the aperture of the 3 or using a form with a corner in the upper right can be observed in some UI typefaces.

The "single story a" can be an issue in typefaces that ise it, adding to the plethora of round forms (eopdqbc etc.). Breaking up the monotony of those shapes is also frequently advised.

"Tail-less" t and r in sans type can be problematic at small sizes.

Post reply on HN