[ubuntu-art] Liberation Fonts

[Conn]

On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 7:24 PM, Ashton <cogneato at gmail.com> wrote:

> I don't understand this system fonts objection. I think I need more details
> other than "it is not a system font" from people in order to understand.
> Also, I don't know what my settings are, but changing to DejaVu gives me
> awful results. Maybe my eyes are screwy. I do use full hinting...I switch
> from a 14" laptop to a 22" lcd at my home...Lib looks good on either...I'm
> completely open to alternatives, but not seeing any others being proposed.
>

As many would say on this list, art is too subjective to vote by committee,
and to compound this problem, many people have no formal training with
regards to art, interface design, etc. On the topic of fonts, it's even more
difficult to get a valid opinion due to a) the unavoidable technical factors
that influence font preferences (the type of screen you own and its native
subpixel order, the resolution you choose, whether you have a preference for
the equivalent of "ClearType" smoothing or if you prefer sharp text, if you
have astygmatism, nearsightedness or farsightedness), and b) I would imagine
not many people on this list are typography experts.

Let me clarify my earlier statements: I actually like the Liberation fonts
and they would be welcome on my system (especially for use in
OpenOffice.org, and I like the Liberation Mono font for use in terminals),
but I would *not* like to see the generic "Sans" (Bitstream Vera Sans) font
replaced by Liberation Sans. From my perspective as a user, I find Sans more
pleasant to use as an application font. I'm afraid I can't explain my
rationale very well, just as I can't explain why I much prefer the
application font to be Tahoma over Arial in Windows...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/ubuntu-art/attachments/20080630/8189bcff/attachment.htm