4 ms·
I can understand the utility of a basic fallback font that just works but if you are already building a large web client, why not just include the fonts you act
by moftz 8y ago
I can understand the utility of a basic fallback font that just works but if you are already building a large web client, why not just include the fonts you actually want to use? That way you get the look you want at whatever resolution without some horrible bitmap font popping up now and then.
- edent 8y agoBecause you don't always know what kind of content you'll be displaying. Especially if you allow user-generated content. Here's an example I found a few years ago - https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2015/11/premature-subsetting-of-web-fonts/ https://shkspr.mobi/blog/2015/11/premature-subsetting-of-web... - an English language website never expected their authors to use the é (e-acute) character. So they removed it from their webfont.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- masklinn 8y agoOne of the issues when you "just include the fonts you actually want to use" is many fonts which get picked that way for "the look you want" only have latin glyphs[0]), and then you get an asiatic or arabic user, and depending on their setup your application may just fail to display their content entirely. [0] or even just a subset if they got "optimised" by anglo-saxon developers who assume ü or ß are useless
- Cthulhu_ 8y agoI think it's aimed at e.g. browser or OS builders who can fall back to this font for single missing characters if need be.