Le vendredi 16 mars 2018 à 04:07 -0700, Adam Williamson a écrit : > > Are you conflating Cantarell and Noto there? I am not especially > qualified to judge the quality of any of these fonts, but the Noto > family's script coverage seems pretty solid: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noto_fonts#List_of_Noto_fonts > > at least some of those seem to be essentially other fonts that have > been 'rebranded' as Noto, so I've no idea how consistent their > appearance is, of course. > > DejaVu seems to have less coverage, Sure Noto is the heavyweight in the room and nothing much approaches it. But even compared to Noto, DejaVu has lots coverage for convenient glyphs that people added over the years, that do not fall easily in script classification, and that are notably absent in “design-for-hire” fonts that focus on script lists. That’s one reason it continues to be popular among users, even latin script users. That’s the difference between cathedral and bazaar approaches. Cathedral is much more consistent and clean, but you better hope your need was in the cathedral architect list (and most actual cathedrals never managed to pursue cathedral approach to the end, they have deviations from the master plan because at one point need trumped unified vision) Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
