[HN Gopher] Mona Sans and Hubot Sans
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Mona Sans and Hubot Sans
        
       Author : waldekm
       Score  : 78 points
       Date   : 2022-12-02 17:59 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (github.blog)
 (TXT) w3m dump (github.blog)
        
       | jccalhoun wrote:
       | In my opinion, any font that makes it hard to distinguish between
       | I and l is a failure.
        
       | yunohn wrote:
       | Why is everyone talking about these as /coding/ fonts? They
       | clearly don't have that positioning or intent:
       | 
       | > Mona Sans ... work as our primary font across mediums ... You
       | can see it in use on our more marketing-oriented pages on GitHub.
       | 
       | > Hubot Sans ... is our secondary brand font at GitHub ... you
       | can see it in use in the ReadME Project, and on the GitHub
       | Universe site.
        
       | mariusmg wrote:
       | Everyone and their dog are making fonts these days. Not
       | complaining about high quality free fonts, just find it a bit
       | strange...
        
         | culi wrote:
         | Variable fonts, color fonts, etc. There's a lot happening
         | 
         | https://v-fonts.com/
         | 
         | I'll still only stick to websafe fonts for actual websites but
         | I'm excited to see what the future holds. Also because I hate
         | Arial
        
           | psygn89 wrote:
           | There's a lot you can do with variable fonts. I remember
           | stumbling upon https://variicon.netlify.app/index.html a year
           | or two ago, although there's disdain for using icons as a
           | font it was eye opening for me with what you could do.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | And none of them seem to have good hinting for low-DPI use.
        
       | aidenn0 wrote:
       | Maybe I'm weird, but I loathe body text in sans-serif fonts. They
       | aren't all equally bad, but ilI are often confusing. Just the
       | other day I was reading something somewhere with a name that
       | ended in "ill" and I had to copy-paste somewhere else to tell it
       | wasn't just a roman-numeral 3 smushed on the end.
       | 
       | And of course sentences that start with "Ill" just break my flow
       | of reading.
        
       | flobosg wrote:
       | There's an earlier font named Mona:
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mona_(font)
        
       | smoldesu wrote:
       | It's too grotesk. I think Apple accidentally set everyone off on
       | the "search for the perfect sans font" but neither this nor the
       | new Discord font is anywhere near as nice as San Francisco.
       | 
       | If you want a clean sans font, I'd highly recommend Plex sans:
       | https://fonts.google.com/specimen/IBM+Plex+Sans
       | 
       | Very straightforward, highly legible at all weights, normal-
       | human-being-style kerning and nicely tucked edges. If you're
       | looking for something more flavorful than Roboto, use this or
       | Inter. Please don't design your own eye-melting garbage, for my
       | sake.
        
         | satvikpendem wrote:
         | Plex Sans is too angular for me, the "f", "g" and "t" for
         | example. I like Grotesk style sans serif fonts personally,
         | there still isn't an amazing one out there.
        
         | BuckyBeaver wrote:
         | Nice call on the Plex Sans, for at least one major reason: The
         | capital "i" has a crossbar.
         | 
         | Any font that doesn't have a proper capital "i" (meaning one
         | WITH CROSSBARS) should be rejected, especially for any kind of
         | technical use. If you can't tell the difference between a
         | lower-case L and a 1, the font is useless. And really the same
         | goes for a capital O or zero.
        
           | nagyf wrote:
           | Plex's capital "O" and it's 0 (zero) is pretty much
           | indistinguishable.
        
             | BuckyBeaver wrote:
        
         | CharlesW wrote:
         | > _If you 're looking for something more flavorful than Roboto,
         | use this or Inter._
         | 
         | Speaking of which, Inter 4.0 is in beta and looking really
         | good. Now's a great time for type aficionados to try it out and
         | offer feedback! https://github.com/rsms/inter/releases
        
           | satvikpendem wrote:
           | Are there any differences between 3 and 4? I didn't see any
           | screenshots anywhere.
        
         | neilpanchal wrote:
         | > Please don't design your own eye-melting garbage, for my
         | sake.
         | 
         | I think there is still so much room to experiment with Grotesk
         | typefaces. Perhaps the frustration is caused by everygoing
         | going Druk in Magazine design and custom Corporate typography
         | that's just incredibly...corporate. Every other grotesk fork of
         | Akzidenz tends to follow Helvetica's path and the New York
         | aesthetic. Public apathy is understandable.
         | 
         | The other fork of Akzidenz is Univers and its derivates; they
         | are wonderful, especially for technical communication. I can't
         | pinpoint why, perhaps it is nostalgia, but perhaps it is its
         | formality and the way it is kerned by Adrian. Genius. I wrote
         | about it on HN a few years ago:
         | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19621544
         | 
         | There are only a couple of decent typefaces that are
         | alternatives to Univers. Unica77 and Swiss 721, both again
         | trying to bring Helvetica into the Univers business.
         | 
         | So, I've taken up the task of propelling Univers forward. I
         | hope it won't melt your eyes.
        
         | smcl wrote:
         | I hate to admit it since IBM are like the OG "big bad company"
         | but their Open Source programming fonts are the ones I like the
         | best out of those that came out recently (Source Code Pro,
         | Cascadia, JetBrains Mono, Mononoki, Go Mono, etc - see
         | https://www.programmingfonts.org)
        
         | lcnmrn wrote:
         | Not as nice as Route 159: https://dotcolon.net/font/route159/
        
         | loudandskittish wrote:
         | ...I can't deal with that f
        
       | dandellion wrote:
       | I wish they introduced GitHub Sans Downtime instead of this.
       | There's already plenty of high quality free fonts to choose from.
        
         | inoffensivename wrote:
         | Hah, good one! I personally use Ubuntu Mono as my programming
         | font, I've yet to find any font I prefer to spend hours a day
         | staring at.
        
           | nvrspyx wrote:
           | I used Ubuntu Mono for awhile, but I'm now a fan of both
           | Cascadia Code/Mono (depending on if you want ligatures) and
           | SF Mono, although the latter is a pain to install on non-
           | macOS systems because you have to unpack the .dmg file and
           | the underlying .pkg files.
        
           | hrbf wrote:
           | May I recommend Berkeley Mono
           | (https://berkeleygraphics.com/typefaces/berkeley-mono/). It's
           | a paid font but well worth it, given you're spending hours
           | every day looking at it. I have found it to be excellent for
           | the shell and editors.
        
             | netr0ute wrote:
             | I really like that font, but that price ($75) is really
             | untenable for me. Is there any alternative?
        
               | ashton314 wrote:
               | Input Mono [1] is beautiful, and kinda looks like
               | Berkeley Mono. It too is paid for commercial use, but
               | it's free for personal.
               | 
               | I used Input for a very long time until I made my own
               | blend of Iosevka [2] that looks very similar--just with
               | more exotic symbols.
               | 
               | [1]: https://input.djr.com/ [2]:
               | https://sr.ht/~ashton314/iosevka-output/
        
           | culi wrote:
           | Yeah that one mono font quiz[0] always ends up recommending
           | it to me
           | 
           | [0] https://www.codingfont.com/
        
             | ternaryoperator wrote:
             | Very handy utility! My foray steers me to Source Code Pro.
        
       | stevefolta wrote:
       | Is Hubot-Sans.ttf working in XWindows for anyone? Mona-Sans.ttf
       | is fine for me, but not Hubot.
        
         | stevefolta wrote:
         | Never mind. It's that hyphen in its name. Mona Sans is called
         | "Mona Sans", but Hubot Sans is called "Hubot-Sans". And
         | FontConfig requires that the hyphen be quoted, eg.:
         | "Hubot\\-Sans-16.5:weight=60".
        
       | gnabgib wrote:
       | This was discussed 22 days ago(119pts, 48 comments)[0], slightly
       | different content[1] but not by much. It seems a shame this blog
       | post didn't address samueloph's point[2] (lower L and upper i are
       | ambiguous)
       | 
       | [0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33553659 [1]:
       | https://github.com/mona-sans [2]:
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33554633
        
         | crazygringo wrote:
         | For a body text font, there's no problem with lower L and upper
         | i being ambiguous. When you're reading paragraphs of text,
         | there's virtually always enough context that it's a non-issue.
         | 
         | Now, if you're displaying code or a password or similar that
         | needs to be retyped, then yes they need to be differentiated,
         | but that's not what a font like this is meant for -- that's
         | what monospaced code fonts are for.
         | 
         | But no differentiation is needed for a proportional sans-serif
         | font intended for regular written language. An uppercase i with
         | crossbars above and below would be jarringly ugly for many
         | sans-serif fonts, and similarly a hook at the top of a
         | lowercase L may not fit the font's personality at all,
         | depending on how other letterforms are designed. (And trying to
         | differentiate the lowercase L with something more subtle, by
         | making it a smidgen taller or angling the top, usually might as
         | well be invisible at body text size.)
        
           | Beltalowda wrote:
           | It still comes up occasionally; just yesterday a customer was
           | talking about the clID field of an XML file in an email, and
           | it's kind of hard to see. For years I thought Douglas McIlroy
           | was named "Mcllroy" (with two lower L's) and I wasn't quite
           | sure how you should pronounce that, until I heard his name
           | pronounced somewhere; "ohh, it's a capital i!"
           | 
           | Given how easy it is to prevent this kind of confusion, I
           | don't really understand why you _wouldn 't_ want to at least
           | provide a subtle hint and make either the I or l stand about
           | just a little bit.
        
             | canucker2016 wrote:
             | It's even worse when one assumes "I" are capital-i's to
             | assuming they are lower-case ells and back.
             | 
             | "Ill-advised llama farm was Ian's folly."
        
       | noizejoy wrote:
       | I'm still very happy to see more high quality and free variable
       | fonts. They save a few lines of code and a bit of network egress
       | when self hosting fonts (for better privacy).
        
         | piskerpan wrote:
         | I thought variable width fonts were pretty heavy? I don't think
         | you actually save data over loading two separate weights. The
         | savings come in later (3+ weights)
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-12-02 23:01 UTC)