Documentation fonts
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios
I read somewhere that serif fonts are easier to read than sans serif fonts. Wikipedia says so as well, but it also says that studies have been inconclusive.
What do you guys think? If Serif is probably easier to read, should we change the Documentation's body text to a serif font?
It depends if the text is on screen (72 DPI) or on paper.
Serif fonts are said to be more legible on paper while Sans Serif is for any type of screen. If the documentation is to be online online only, then maybe keeping it at a Sans font is better. Even if a person prints the docs on paper, it doesn't make the Sans font automatically unreadable.
One thing I can assure, which is that, you can feel more comfortable reading some sort of fonts. And perhaps that can make you feel like you desire to read more, and you increase you "overall performance" XD at reading. Like some sort of placebo effect.
It happens to me with this font, and I wonder if you can tell me what font it is and if it is free (I mean, as in freedom) http://www.ubuntu.com/support/community/web-forums
I truly feel comfortable reading that sort of font, perhaps, it's just a placebo...XD
I already found it! XD
It's a sans font, and you're right it is really nice to look at. Is it the official Ubuntu font?
Wikipedia says that the Ubuntu font license is copyleft:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ubuntu_%28typeface%29#Ubuntu_Font_Licence
Read this thread:
http://trisquel.info/en/forum/ubuntu-fonts-license
Thanks! As Wolftune said:
"Free Software does not conflict with trademarks. This is Free. Naming rights are NOT an essential freedom, period."
What I get is that it's trademarked but that doesn't affect my 4 fundamental freedoms.
Thanks for the threat! It helps! :D Now I can use it freely! :D
Nonetheless:
"Canonical, you are including proprietary software in Ubuntu's kernel and expressly promoting it in some of your distribution channels. With this, you are telling your users that you care more about convenience than their freedom. How can you even claim to be "open source" in this way? Now, when someone tells you you are subjecting your users to a license that could take their freedom away at any moment, you do NOTHING for months on end. The Ubuntu typeface is a beautiful font, but freedom comes before beauty."
Source: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu-font-licence/+bug/1167425?comments=all
I guess so. If so, then it's very convenient for the free software community to use it! :D
"The Ubuntu Font Licence allows the fonts to be "used, studied, modified and redistributed freely" given that the license terms are met. The license is copyleft and all derivative works must be distributed under the same license. Documents that use the fonts are not required to be licensed under the Ubuntu Font Licence."
- Inicie sesión o regístrese para enviar comentarios