Articles
ŕ´Ąŕ´żŕ´ŕ´żŕ´ąŕľŕ´ąŕľ˝ ŕ´ŕ´žŕ´˛ŕ´¤ŕľŕ´¤ŕľ എലയഞള ŕ´ ŕ´ŕľŕ´ˇŕ´°ŕ´ŕľŕ´ŕľž: http://books.sayahna.org/ml/pdf/khh-typography-01.pdf
The italic design process https://gaultney.org/jvgtype/italics/italic-design-process/
Japanese typography https://aisforfonts.com/sinograms
Web Typography
Links
(sourced from https://css-tricks.com/links-on-typography/). Most of them talks about Latin typography even it is not stated explicitly
âHow to pick a Typeface for User Interface and App Design?â by Oliver SchĂśndorfer. I like the term âfunctional textâ for everything that isnât display or body type. Look for clearly distinct letters, open shapes, and little contrast. This reminds me of how we have the charmap screen on the Coding Fonts site, but still need to re-shoot most of the screenshots so they all have it.
âUniwidth typefaces for interface designâ by Lisa Staudinger. âUniwidth typefaces, on the other hand, are proportionally-spaced typefaces, but every character occupies the same space across different cuts or weights.â So you can change the
font-weightbut the box the type occupies doesnât change. Nice for menus! This is a different concept, but it reminds me of the Operator typeface (as opposed to Operator Mono) which âis a natural width family, its characters differing in proportion according to their weight and underlying design.ââShould we standardize the naming of font weights?â by Pedro Mascarenhas. As in, the literal names as opposed to
font-weightin CSS where we already have names and numeric values but are at the mercy of the font. The image of how dramatically different fonts, say Gilroy Heavy and Avenir Heavy, makes the point.âAbout Legibility and Readabilityâ by Bruno Maag. âFunctional accessibilityâ is another good term. We can create heuristics like specific
font-sizes that make for good accessibility, but all nuance is lost there. Good typography involves making type readable and legible. Generally, anyway. I realize typography is a broad world and you might be designing a grungy skateboard that is intentionally neither readable nor legible. But if you do achieve readability and legibility, it has sorts of benefits, like aesthetics and me-taking-you-seriously, but even better: accessibility.âFont size is useless; letâs fix itâ by Nikita Prokopov. âUselessâ is maybe strong since it, ya know, controls the font size. But this graphic does make the point. I found myself making that same point recently. Across typefaces, an identical
font-sizecan feel dramatically different.âThe sans selectionâ by Tejas Bhatt. A journey from a huge selection of fonts for a long-form journalism platform down to just a few, then finally lands on SĂśhne. I enjoyed all of the very practical considerations like (yet again) a tall x-height, not-too-heavy, and even price (although the final selection was among the most costly of the bunch).
âPlymouth Pressâ by James Brocklehurst. You donât see many âSVG fontsâ these days, even though the idea (any SVG can be a character) is ridiculously cool. This one, being all grungy, has far too many vector points to be practical on the web, but that isnât a big factor for local design software use.
âBeyond Calibri: Finding Microsoftâs next default fontâ (I guess nobody wanted that byline). Iâm so turned off by the sample graphics they chose for the blog post that I canât bring myself to care, even though this should be super interesting to follow because of the scale of use here. The tweet is slightly better.
âWhy you should Self-Host Google Fonts in 2021âł by Gijo Varghese. I am aware of âCache Partitioningâ (my site canât use cached fonts from your site, even if they both come from Google) but I could have seen myself trotting out the other two arguments in a discussion about this and itâs interesting to see them debunked here.
Last updated