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

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

public-sans.digital.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 245 posts

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

#91

Post by dragonwriter »

optymizer wrote: post #74
uses wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Is Sans Serif Fonts the department where the US government can really make a difference Isn't this a pretty basic "appeal to worse problems" fallacy?

I don't think so. The way I understand the "appeal to worse problems" fallacy is: "Y is worse than X, so why work on X if we haven't solved Y yet?" In this case, I see X as a solved problem (perfectly appropriate Sans Serif typefaces exist) and Y as unsolved, whereas the fallacy treats both X and Y as unsolved.

So its appeal to worse problems masked by false dichotomy (solvedness is a continuum, not a binary state)?

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

#93

Post by ricardobeat »

jancsika wrote: post #87

Before I submit a bug report-- is there a good reason that the zero isn't dotted in this font? For example, executive order numbers have both "O" and "0" appearing in them. But I'm sure there are stronger examples in various gov't depts. where those characters can occur in sequence and create errors. Not to mention any code snippets that already appear in government web sites. I suppose the extra ink could be a conce…

Usually these are available as “alternates”, can be enabled in system text dialog on MacOS, also through css. (Not on desktop right now so can’t check).

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

#94

Post by saagarjha »

jancsika wrote: post #87

Before I submit a bug report-- is there a good reason that the zero isn't dotted in this font? For example, executive order numbers have both "O" and "0" appearing in them. But I'm sure there are stronger examples in various gov't depts. where those characters can occur in sequence and create errors. Not to mention any code snippets that already appear in government web sites. I suppose the extra ink could be a conce…

I'm not sure the zero should be dotted/slashed by default, but it doesn't look like the font has a variant for it either…

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

#95

Post by saagarjha »

ricardobeat wrote: post #93
jancsika wrote: post #87

Before I submit a bug report-- is there a good reason that the zero isn't dotted in this font? For example, executive order numbers have both "O" and "0" appearing in them. But I'm sure there are stronger examples in various gov't depts. where those characters can occur in sequence and create errors. Not to mention any code snippets that already appear in government web sites. I suppose the extra ink could be a conce…

Usually these are available as “alternates”, can be enabled in system text dialog on MacOS, also through css. (Not on desktop right now so can’t check).

I checked and it didn't seem to work :(

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

#96

Post by saagarjha »

Someone1234 wrote: post #79
dpcx wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://openforest.fs.usda.gov/christmas-trees/forests has a pretty heavy dependency on Javascript (read: there's no fallback to anything non-javascript, so I get a white page). It feels like that goes against some of the things that 18F is about.

Pages don't need a fallback to non-Javascript in 2019. Accessibility technologies now fully support a JS enabled web, with accessibility standards following suit. That leaves only those who have voluntarily disabled JavaScript ( I've worked on public facing government websites (not 18F). We simply don't support this edge case, and our legal department supports our legal right to do so (in particular in relation to AD…

> Pages don't need a fallback to non-Javascript in 2019.

Strongly disagree. Having your page completely break instead of degrading gracefully puts up a barrier to those who cannot run JavaScript (for example, users with older, weaker computers).

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

#97

Post by nulbyte »

Someone1234 wrote: post #79
dpcx wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://openforest.fs.usda.gov/christmas-trees/forests has a pretty heavy dependency on Javascript (read: there's no fallback to anything non-javascript, so I get a white page). It feels like that goes against some of the things that 18F is about.

Pages don't need a fallback to non-Javascript in 2019. Accessibility technologies now fully support a JS enabled web, with accessibility standards following suit. That leaves only those who have voluntarily disabled JavaScript ( I've worked on public facing government websites (not 18F). We simply don't support this edge case, and our legal department supports our legal right to do so (in particular in relation to AD…

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.

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

#98

Post by logfromblammo »

eddietejeda wrote: post #72
SamWhited wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wanted to work for the USDS for a while. I'd still like to, but the invasiveness of an SF-86 which is required for some reason even if you don't need a security clearance, drug testing (I'd pass, but I'm not okay with requiring one anyways), and the fact that I'd have to move to D.C. make the sacrifice a big thing to weigh against the public good you'd be able to do. It's a tough call.

USDS's requirement to be in DC is a tough ask, but necessary given the work they do. At 18F, we travel to DC a couple of times a year, but we are mostly remote. There are significant hubs in SF, NYC, DC, and CHI, but the remote culture is the most successful I've seen.

I'm fine with the SF-86 once every 10 years. It's moving to DC Metro that's the deal-breaker.

And even if I were okay with both things, I'd rather fill out the SF-86 to get a real clearance, and work for one of the military-industrial-congressional complex "Beltway Baron" companies for higher pay, more job openings, and no 4-year term limit.

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

#99

Post by harshreality »

Sans is overused. Please do not use (or carefully consider before using) sans fonts for long blocks of text you expect people to read.[1]

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYKFWqVVzg#t=34m53s

"I disagree, I like sans [for long prose] better" comments miss the point; this is not an anecdata competition, it's about how many people prefer each one (and also it would be worth considering how strongly they hold that preference, since mildly pissing off even a slight majority of your readers/customers is better than really pissing off a smaller percentage). Even if you're skeptical of the studies Mayer looked at, Google (literata) and Amazon (bookerly) seem to be in the serif camp. Do you think Amazon made a mistake, too?

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

#100

Post by JshWright »

harshreality wrote: post #99

Sans is overused. Please do not use (or carefully consider before using) sans fonts for long blocks of text you expect people to read.[1] [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soYKFWqVVzg#t=34m53s "I disagree, I like sans [for long prose] better" comments miss the point; this is not an anecdata competition, it's about how many people prefer each one (and also it would be worth considering how strongly they hold that pr…

That's a pretty disgusting video description...
Post reply on HN