[mrweasel]

I still don’t see how picking a custom font over a default one contributed much to communication. Sure, the font need to be legable, clear destinction between letters all that stuff, but the system fonts is most likely better than a custom one for those things anyway.

[chrisseaton]

Design and art communicate. In fact, that's all they do.

Fonts are associated with different periods of time, different groups of people, different artistic and even philosophical movements. Picking a font can help communicate how you see yourself and what you are trying to achieve. A picture paints a thousand words.

A world without typography would be a poorer world.

[zelphirkalt]

Then why not share all typography with everyone under a license, that allows every OS maker to include all the fonts they want plus allowing users to choose what else to install and then only use system fonts? That way we can have it all, fast websites, without additional secret server side tracking, and the fonts of the system being used and the artist getting their message communicated. No need for any web font.

[chrisseaton]

I guess there aren’t any commercial incentives to do that.

But that doesn’t change that typography is valuable.

[zelphirkalt]

We can definitely agree on that. I would want every designer to be able to express themselves as they wish to, without forcing their vision on everyone.

I just don't want to download megabytes of fonts when visiting a website, sending an additional request to some Google servers. It will always remain blocked on my end. I hope we can somehow get to a solution, that allows each side their choices, instead of prefering one dictating how things are regardless of the other side's wishes. That means, if I choose to have all websites display their text in some font meant for dyslexia, I should have the possibility to do so, without the whole design breaking. If I enjoy monospaced fonts perhaps (although that is a stretch) even that. Or if I just want my plain and simple system fonts, I should be able to do that and still make use of the website like every other visitor.

At least this much I expect from a proper design. CSS these days is so powerful, I would expect web designers to know their tools, including what can be done with CSS3, their choices and the consequences for visitors.

I am not even a frontend developer mainly. I do all kinds of things, sometimes also frontend, but I prefer not to. Yet I have apparently informed myself more about what is possible with CSS and the right approach to responsive design, than what I see implemented in many websites. I feel that some basic knowledge about what CSS can do should be a minimum requirement for anyone touching frontend stuff. It makes me question, whether there ever has been a web designer giving proper thought about some websites and a person, who has tested these things like "What happens, if the webfont is not loaded?". Maybe the website is some quick and dirty output of some tool, and the actual person developing the website had no good knowledge about web development and their tools. Ultimately what does a website consist of? Mostly HTML, CSS and perhaps if needed some JS. Some static resources like images, OK. If one does not know these well, how does one expect to deliver good work?

Perhaps it is also that people are not given enough time to really make a good design and implement that with proper CSS. Design and implementation of it takes time. It is the reason, why there is a job or role called web designer, UX designer. Someone actually gets down to it and does a good job, that earns my respect. But not this "Oh you used a slightly different font, the design of this website cannot work properly any longer!"-crap.