Websites/Taskforce/Proposals/Web Fonts: Difference between revisions
Theinterned (talk | contribs) |
Theinterned (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
=Solution= | =Solution= | ||
One solution is to find a font or set of fonts that Mozilla adopts and recommends for use in websites. | One solution is to find a font or set of fonts that Mozilla adopts and recommends for use in websites. | ||
There are a number of sources that list fonts that are available with varying degrees of free and/or open licenses. | |||
*[www.fontsquirrel.com/ Font Squirrel] | |||
[ | *[http://www.theleagueofmoveabletype.com/ The League of Moveable Type] | ||
Many of the free fonts are free for a reason; they are incomplete or are hard on the eyes. | |||
Another Possibility would be to commission the design of an open font similar to Google's commissioning of Droid Sans. | |||
Finally, a blend of the two would be to select a currently available free font and work with the foundry to round it out. | |||
=Use Cases= | =Use Cases= | ||
Revision as of 20:35, 3 August 2010
Web Fonts Proposal (Status: Draft)
Working Group
Ned Schwartz and David Boswell
Problem
Mozilla branding uses the FontFont Meta font for logotype. However, FF Meta is a proprietary font with a closed license.
It is felt that it would serve Mozilla's goals best to search for a free and open alternative to FF Meta.
A free and open font becomes especially important when it comes to extending the Mozilla brand to it's web properties through the use of css3 @font-face embedding. FF Meta cannot be included in a Mozilla project without compromising Mozilla's goal of distributing only open-licensed code (where is this goal stated? -ned).
This brings up a few questions:
- Should Meta be replaced completely in Mozilla branding, or are we just concerned about web typography?
- Do we want and/or need to have consistant typography across mozilla products and websites?
- How open do we need the licensing of our replacement font to be? Is it simply being free as in beer good enough to allows code to be distributed? Or do we want a license that allows modification etc.
Solution
One solution is to find a font or set of fonts that Mozilla adopts and recommends for use in websites. There are a number of sources that list fonts that are available with varying degrees of free and/or open licenses.
- [www.fontsquirrel.com/ Font Squirrel]
- The League of Moveable Type
Many of the free fonts are free for a reason; they are incomplete or are hard on the eyes.
Another Possibility would be to commission the design of an open font similar to Google's commissioning of Droid Sans.
Finally, a blend of the two would be to select a currently available free font and work with the foundry to round it out.
Use Cases
Already there are a few fonts that have been adopted in the Mozilla web universe:
Museo Sans
Museo is a great font, has serif, slab-serif and sans serif typefaces. Unfortunately the free variant of the font is pretty limited: there is only one weight in each variant available, and the license is not very permissive.
http://new.myfonts.com/fonts/exljbris/museo-sans/ http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/Museo-Sans
In use on:
Titillium
http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/TitilliumText
In use on:
Droid Sans
Created for the Open Handset Alliance, Droid is a nice, quiet serif. It is very readable, but it doesn't have a huge amount of character. The font is also limited in it's range, lacking italics in the sans-serif .
http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/Droid-Sans
In use on:
PT Sans
PT Sans is not in use anywhere in Mozilla yet, but it is a great heir to Meta's throne; it is a humanist sans-serif with an inviting and fun character while maintaining clarity.