Live data from Hacker News

Public Sans – A strong, neutral typeface for text or display

public-sans.digital.gov

151–160 of 245 posts

Re: Public Sans – A strong, neutral typeface for text or display

#151
post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they pick a font, even an open source one, it could encourage people to copy them. Or be making some (very minor) statement about open source. By developing their own font, they don't set preference for any organization, group, or business.

They do develop it on GitHub, which I would consider to be a stronger statement than font choice.

Well, nobody said they had to be consistent...

Re: Public Sans – A strong, neutral typeface for text or display

#152
post #103

What is the advantage of this over Open Sans? Is it less encumbered legally? Or are there other advantages? Or is it simply another alternative, which is also great.

Yes, Open Sans is under the Apache License while Public Sans should be under Public Domain (although this is a bit unclear and is being debated in the github issues).

While that's a great reason in the US, internationally unless it's under the CC0 or similar the Apache License is actually preferable to Public Domain (assigning things to public domain is not trivial or even possible everywhere)

Re: Public Sans – A strong, neutral typeface for text or display

#153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yup. I run Federalist at 18F and absolutely love the work, the challenge and colleagues. We do everything in the open, so feel free to follow our work here: https://github.com/18F/federalist We also implement the USWDS, which you can follow here: https://github.com/18F/federalist-uswds-jekyll Let me know if you have any questions!

>> Let me know if you have any questions! If this is meant for web sites, I have a question and I ask this on HN a lot. Why does the government need to provide ANY fonts? I have a real problem with websites pushing their own fonts on users. I don't think it's their place. Users should select their preferred font in their own browser. Why would a US government site feel the need to use particular fonts? If this is for…

Because ~no users curate their fonts, and making your site look better for the ~all users who don't curate their own fonts is the better more pragmatic choice by such a large margin that it isn't really worth much thought.

Does this negatively affect your experience? Can't you override fonts if you want to?

Edit: note, I'm not the person the question was directed at, and have no connection to the federalist project at all.

Re: Public Sans – A strong, neutral typeface for text or display

#155

Is it legal for the federal government to specify a font license other than “This is released into the public domain”? They automatically give up all copyright upon publication, which ought to exhaust any licensing terms.

How is the USWDS specifying a font license? It's a derivative work, so the license comes from upstream.

If a license is granted to a work and the US government accepts that license and then publishes derivatives of that work, the US government releases its derivatives into the public domain without regard for the original licensing, as they have complied with the terms of the license to them and have no legal right to encumber their fork with any restrictions. Licenses depend on copyright, without which they are unenforceable, and the government is prohibited from copyrighting any work. The license clause should, therefore, be invalid and unenforceable upon any derivatives of this work, regardless of the accidental inclusion of it.

My idea is being hashed out on their GitHub, though sadly I suspect they’ll need lawyers to advise them rather than HN commenters such as I: https://github.com/uswds/public-sans/issues/30

Re: Public Sans – A strong, neutral typeface for text or display

#156
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wholeheartedly disagree. This is a public-facing government website. It ought to degrade gracefully in order to reach the broadest possible audience. Or, write a decent site to start with, and you wouldn't have to worry about degrading. The entire page is nothing but a shell for a web app written in JavaScript that doesn't need to be a web app written entirely in JavaScript.

> It ought to degrade gracefully in order to reach the broadest possible audience. You mean under 1% of users that intentionally broke their browser? Seems unreasonable to dedicate resources to that, that could be better spent on 99% of our users. Why should the 1% get special treatment? And what other parts of their browser can they disable that we need to support, perhaps no CSS? Maybe IE5? Maybe they only render X…

Ideally, yes. Realistically, it’s not worth the cost.

Re: Public Sans – A strong, neutral typeface for text or display

#157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL, I believe the whole idea behind GPL is to make sure GPL supersede what you might claim otherwise. So if the federal government can possibly make a derived work into public domain (or crown copyright if UK) instead of GPL, that's a loophole in GPL! (I know this work is not GPL, but similar idea applies)

I imagine just the government's code contributions would be public domain, and public domain code should be GPL compatible.

Public domain may be incorporated into a GPL project if it is relicensed at time of commit under GPL by a committer whose country honors public domain to the degree necessary, but it may not coexist in a dual-license scenario with GPL, and that commit’s relicensing has no implied effect on the public domain repository from which the content was drawn.

Re: Public Sans – A strong, neutral typeface for text or display

#160

This is so interesting. These modern sites clash really hard with my mental visual of "Government technology." And it led me to this, which is maybe even more interesting: https://federalist.18f.gov/

The USDS (US Digital Service) was born in the fire of the healthcare.gov fiasco, and several industry veterans from Google stepped in to fix the infrastructure issues they saw within the US Government. Currently, @Matt_Cutts is leading the org. I can only think that your comment brings a smile to his face.

There are also a couple contractors that came out of the healthcare.gov rescue (notably: Nava [1] and Ad Hoc [2]) trying to do the same kind of work. I recently left a long career at Google to work for Ad Hoc, and we get to work alongside the great folks at USDS trying to make things better.

Hit me up if you're interested in getting into this space!

[1] https://www.navapbc.com/ [2] https://adhocteam.us/

Post reply on HN