[rob74]

Actually I like that one better! For instance, Inclusive Sans boasts about its "clear distinction between I [uppercase i], l [lowercase L] and 1", but the lowercase L is just a vertical bar, so might as well be mistaken for an I if there is no I to compare it to. In Atkinson Hyperlegible, the lowercase L has a slight "tail" which helps distinguish it - and the serifs on the uppercase i feel a bit less jarring.

[jszymborski]

It is a bit weird that Inclusive Sans' lower case L doesn't have a tail considering this font is very "tail-forward" for lack of a better word.

The thing that irks me the most about Atkinson Hyperlegible is that there is no medium weight and the bold weight is way too heavy for many applications. I also just kinda like the way Inclusive Sans looks more, but the Atkinson letterforms are definitely easily identified even when blurred.

[kibwen]

Agreed, the font has a lot of playful character without giving away that it was designed for a specific functional purpose. And it looks like it's freely licensed as well, so not only is it free to use, but it's also free to ship alongside things.

However, note that it does feature mirrored "b" and "d", which can be difficult to distinguish for people with dyslexia.

[rob74]

That's probably because they focus on people with low vision - but yeah, they could have added the same "tail" which the lowercase L has to the lowercase D too, that wouldn't have felt out of place...

[extra88]

Atkinson Hyperlegible does have a tail on the 'd' but it's much more subtle than the one on the 'l'. As mentioned, its main priority is low vision, not dyslexia.