3 ms·

Ah yes, we should entirely limit typographic creativity due to creating slight irritation for the lowest common denominator. Guess we should stick to web safe c

Ah yes, we should entirely limit typographic creativity due to creating slight irritation for the lowest common denominator. Guess we should stick to web safe colours and 90% JPEGs too. Self-hosted web fonts are fine.

unmole 4y ago
> typographic creativity More like self-indulgent wankery.
- antihero 4y ago
  Ah yes, aesthetics, visual style is entirely wankery, gotcha. We should all stick to verdana or something.
  - unmole 4y ago
    Choosing misguided form at the expense of function most definitely is wankery.
    - jhanschoo 4y ago
      You may not care for branding in webpages, but many people do appreciate it.
      - midislack 4y ago
        No they don't. Trust me. Nobody does outside the brander.
      - 0des 4y ago
        who cares if all the body panels are misaligned, everyone else has a tesla, then dangit i want a tesla
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
jamil7 4y ago
Ah yes, "typographic creativity" - going to Google Fonts dot com and choosing Roboto.
- antihero 4y ago
  Yeah I mean public CDNs are of course bad but reducing the idea of type on the web to its lowest form is a strawman
  - 0des 4y ago
    while i agree with you that webfonts are suboptimal, i dont see how this is a strawman
bee_rider 4y ago
Quite some time ago, I gave up on letting sites set their own fonts. Why allow it? The ones on my system are perfectly usable and familiar -- some sites may pick slightly better ones, others will go for some annoying whimsical bullshit. Going back and forth on allowing sites to set text/background colors. Good content doesn't need graphic design tricks to remain interesting.