google/fonts
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/google/fonts.git synced 2024-12-17 13:41:32 +03:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Fix ordered+nested list syntax

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Nathan Williams 2022-03-23 11:22:58 -07:00 committed by GitHub
parent a9de7917e3
commit 418156cc8b
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 17 additions and 17 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

34
knowledge/modules/choosing_type/lessons/a_checklist_for_choosing_type/content.md
View File

@ -2,23 +2,23 @@ Every article in [our “Choosing type” section](/module/choosing_type) aims t
We’ll start off with the checklist itself—which is also [available on GitHub](https://github.com/elliotjaystocks/choosing-type-checklist/blob/main/checklist.md)—and then spend some time diving into each part of it.
- 1. The typeface suits the purpose of the project
-- 1a. Its personality will prompt the appropriate emotional response(s) from our audience
-- 1b. Its design fits the intended use
- 2. The typeface’s design is comprehensive
-- 2a. It has enough multi-language support
-- 2b. It contains legible details
-- 2c. It has at least the basic weights and styles
-- 2d. Even better: It has alternate glyphs
-- 2e. Even better: It has additional weights and styles (or grades)
-- 2f. Even better: It has multiple widths
-- 2g. Even better: It has different optical sizes
- 3. The font files are reliable
-- 3a. All of the design features checked above are actually included in the font files being used
-- 3b. The fonts are properly spaced
- 4. The fonts are usable in the situation(s) required
-- 4a. If serving as a secondary typeface to a primary choice, there’s a suitable balance between distinction and harmony
-- 4b. We have, or our client has, the appropriate font license(s)
1. The typeface suits the purpose of the project
a. Its personality will prompt the appropriate emotional response(s) from our audience
b. Its design fits the intended use
2. The typeface’s design is comprehensive
a. It has enough multi-language support
b. It contains legible details
c. It has at least the basic weights and styles
d. Even better: It has alternate glyphs
e. Even better: It has additional weights and styles (or grades)
f. Even better: It has multiple widths
g. Even better: It has different optical sizes
3. The font files are reliable
a. All of the design features checked above are actually included in the font files being used
b. The fonts are properly spaced
4. The fonts are usable in the situation(s) required
a. If serving as a secondary typeface to a primary choice, there’s a suitable balance between distinction and harmony
b. We have, or our client has, the appropriate font license(s)
Let’s explore each item on that list in a little more depth.