undefined | Better HN

0 pointsoptymizer6y ago0 comments

The choice was never between Comic Sans or New Government Font.

There are a plethora of established sans serif typefaces available under various licenses, as seen on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sans_serif_typefaces

These have existed well before someone said "let's create Public Sans!". It would be nice to know what the reasoning was. The Github page only goes into the details of how Public Sans is different from Libre Franklin.

0 comments

yborg6y ago

As a taxpayer I personally am pleased that this is at least one place the government isn't subsidizing some corporation for private gain at my expense. Even if a foundry licensed the font to the government for free, it would be free advertising for that entity. This is one area where I think it makes excellent sense for the government to have done something on its own. The surprise is that it actually looks decent.

tptacek6y ago

Many (most?) of those typefaces are commercially licensed, and can't serve as a universal "default" for typography across all the USG's web properties. Additionally: almost none of them are in OS/browser font stacks, so using them would incur logistical problems in addition to licensing.

JdeBP6y ago

There are two problems with that reasoning. First: it is clearly contradicted by the inclusion of Source Sans Pro and Merriweather, both licensed under the SIL OFL and developed by third parties, in the USWDS list of components. Second: creating another font that isn't in operating systems and WWW browsers does not solve the latter problem.

* https://github.com/uswds/uswds-for-designers#fonts

* https://designsystem.digital.gov/components/typography/

* https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-sans-pro

* https://github.com/SorkinType/Merriweather/blob/master/READM...

optymizerOP6y ago

Switching to Public Sans solves none of the problems you're pointing out.

According to the Public Sans's Github page, "Source Sans Pro" was the USWDS default, which is a SIL font (so no licensing issues) and is also not in the OS/browser font stack.

jancsika6y ago

I don't understand your second point. Public Sans isn't in OS/browser font stacks, either. What makes its inclusion more likely than, say, a 15 year-old open source font like DejaVu Sans?

tptacek6y ago

I took the parent comment to be saying, "look, there are all these preexisting sans typefaces, why not just take one of the ones on this list". The answer: because they'd have to arrange to pay, and to source them from the commercial services that make them available.

I agree that there are other typefaces they could use! I was mostly commenting on how a list of faces that includes Avenir, Univers, and FF Meta was probably not the best summary of the available options.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

yborg6y ago

tptacek6y ago

JdeBP6y ago

* https://github.com/uswds/uswds-for-designers#fonts

* https://designsystem.digital.gov/components/typography/

* https://github.com/adobe-fonts/source-sans-pro

* https://github.com/SorkinType/Merriweather/blob/master/READM...

optymizerOP6y ago

Switching to Public Sans solves none of the problems you're pointing out.

According to the Public Sans's Github page, "Source Sans Pro" was the USWDS default, which is a SIL font (so no licensing issues) and is also not in the OS/browser font stack.

jancsika6y ago

I don't understand your second point. Public Sans isn't in OS/browser font stacks, either. What makes its inclusion more likely than, say, a 15 year-old open source font like DejaVu Sans?

tptacek6y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse