I'm interested in the Typeface itself. - The diagonal/emphasis on "5" is a great improvement to differentiate it from "S". Roboto tried something similar, but e

I'm interested in the Typeface itself. - The diagonal/emphasis on "5" is a great improvement to differentiate it from "S". Roboto tried something similar, but execution is better here imo. - Reducing the standard width deviation between letters will also be of great help for mobile, number driven usage - without going full monospace. - The "u" simply being an inverted "n", the "m" using the same shoulders and stems as the "n are things that go against the premise of a fully legible font. I would revise this. What do you think?