Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Modern Font Stacks

modernfontstacks.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 80 posts

Re: Modern Font Stacks

#71

Post by xigoi »

ryandrake wrote: post #42
myfonj wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> esoteric browser prefs That hurts. I see where you are standing, and can confirm you expressed opinion of the contemporary majority of browser users, but man, how sad it that. The attitude diverged by a light years, when "Setting preferred fonts for generic font families" is now "esoteric". (Web) browsers ("user agents") came to existence with these capabilities in mind, and even now are build around the principle…

Browsers have ceded way too much control to web designers. The user should be in control. When it comes to what fonts the computer uses, the text size, the color scheme, the user preference should be able to easily override the web site's code. Who's computer is it, anyway?

The problem is that most fonts don’t support basic OpenType features. I make heavy use of small caps on my websites (they are IMO criminally underrated). If I were not using a custom font, most users would get hideous “synthetic” small caps.

Re: Modern Font Stacks

#72

Post by chrismorgan »

krono wrote: post #10

An example of something to keep in mind with this technique is that you might actually end up causing the browser to render a different font than either you or the user intended. For a practical example: Environment - Latest Firefox on Windows 10. - Manually installed fonts 'Cascadia Code' and 'JetBrains Mono NL'. - Firefox default 'monospace' font set to 'JetBrains Mono NL'. Setting `font-family: monospace;` would e…

> 1. `ui-monospace` - remains unsupported by Firefox which is lame (would also render 'Consolas').

Nothing but Apple operating systems even has a concept matching ui-monospace/ui-sans-serif/ui-serif/ui-rounded. And no one but Apple has implemented them in their browsers. I don’t believe they should be included in any standard: the very concept is not, in practice, cross-platform.

Even system-ui is super dodgy to use. In practice people have been using it as a proxy for a possibly-prettier sans-serif, but that’s just not what it is. The vast majority of its usage is inappropriate.

Re: Modern Font Stacks

#74

Post by michaelcampbell »

krono wrote: post #10

An example of something to keep in mind with this technique is that you might actually end up causing the browser to render a different font than either you or the user intended. For a practical example: Environment - Latest Firefox on Windows 10. - Manually installed fonts 'Cascadia Code' and 'JetBrains Mono NL'. - Firefox default 'monospace' font set to 'JetBrains Mono NL'. Setting `font-family: monospace;` would e…

> Please, if you want to render font and it has to be something specific

Is that what this article is trying to achieve? I really like my car, but it's not what I'd reach for to haul a load of 4'x8' plywood home.

Re: Modern Font Stacks

#75

Post by monooso »

michaelcampbell wrote: post #74
krono wrote: post #10

An example of something to keep in mind with this technique is that you might actually end up causing the browser to render a different font than either you or the user intended. For a practical example: Environment - Latest Firefox on Windows 10. - Manually installed fonts 'Cascadia Code' and 'JetBrains Mono NL'. - Firefox default 'monospace' font set to 'JetBrains Mono NL'. Setting `font-family: monospace;` would e…

> Please, if you want to render font and it has to be something specific Is that what this article is trying to achieve? I really like my car, but it's not what I'd reach for to haul a load of 4'x8' plywood home.

I don't understand your comment.

If you don't want to render a specific font from a given list, the font stack is redundant. If you do want to render a specific font from a given list, the font stack does not work (for the reasons given).

Re: Modern Font Stacks

#76

Post by xp84 »

dhosek wrote: post #45
hu3 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Allow pages to choose their own fonts" in settings. Yes, this is nuclear option, but I can attest that I use it time to time, and it is quite usable. Does this nuke icon fonts? I presume yes.

Icon fonts are bad for accessibility. Better to use SVG graphics and provide alt text for screen readers.

What’s bad for usability is using icons on their own. Using icons with visible labels is the best practice among people who actually want their software to be usable.

And of course “bad for usability” becomes absolutely catastrophic for a11y.

For those who prioritize aesthetics over usability and use icons alone though, there are at least a dozen methods to make assistive tech read the names of your icon buttons. Something as simple as aria-label is one way.

Re: Modern Font Stacks

#77

Post by xp84 »

reaperducer wrote: post #27
krono wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These font stacks don't handle anything at all, they just throw a bunch of common typeface names at the wall and they can't even tell what sticks because it's so random. All the while, the user might have a prefered fallback font set that they prefer over any of the ones in the font stack - and even if that isn't the case, simply using 'monospace' as the only fallback will render the default monospace font anyway. I…

they just throw a bunch of common typeface names at the wall and they can't even tell what sticks because it's so random. Anytime someone on HN doesn't understand CSS, they throw up their hands and call it random. Just because you don't understand what's happening doesn't mean it's random. I don't understand the SAM76 programming language, but I don't pretend that !%ii,*,1,1,!%mu,*,%F,%su,*,1//////////= is "random."…

> the number of people manually overriding fonts isn't even a rounding error. It's not even a rounding error's rounding error

This is very obviously true. And given the fact that 100% of mainstream websites and 99.99% of non-mainstream ones use font declarations other than “serif”, “sans-serif”, or “monospace,” it is absolutely unsurprising that no one (but us super nerds) bothers to set this setting that every website will override.

And indeed, the near-universal usage of web fonts today has taken us even farther into the territory where a web property specifies the precise appearance, leaving no decisions to the user agent. If it weren’t for responsive layouts being standard, the Web would have more in common with a PDF than the early HTML web where users might have a reason to use user stylesheets and specify their preferred fonts.

Re: Modern Font Stacks

#78

Post by xp84 »

ryandrake wrote: post #42
myfonj wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> esoteric browser prefs That hurts. I see where you are standing, and can confirm you expressed opinion of the contemporary majority of browser users, but man, how sad it that. The attitude diverged by a light years, when "Setting preferred fonts for generic font families" is now "esoteric". (Web) browsers ("user agents") came to existence with these capabilities in mind, and even now are build around the principle…

Browsers have ceded way too much control to web designers. The user should be in control. When it comes to what fonts the computer uses, the text size, the color scheme, the user preference should be able to easily override the web site's code. Who's computer is it, anyway?

The branding people have definitely won this war here. I agree with you, but the answer to your final question is, sadly these days, never the user or the supposed owner of the hardware. I think it’s pretty easy to argue today that when you boot a computer or phone, it belongs to Apple or Microsoft or Google. When you open a website or “app,“ the computer temporarily belongs to its developer. The fact that even browsers don’t have a built-in, simple-to-configure option to toggle persistent cookies on or off per website, opt-in, of course, is all the evidence you need of that for the web. None of this is OK with me, but it’s the world we have now.

Re: Modern Font Stacks

#80

Post by zghst »

Still would love a geometric chunky bold font, like Circular or Sharp Sans, shame that Geometric Humanist doesn’t have heavier weights.
Post reply on HN