Simon Albrecht <simon.albre...@mail.de> writes: > I hope you don’t mind if I keep the poll public. > > On 03.03.2016 00:29, Ophir Lifshitz wrote: >> Hello, >> >> In my opinion, a "classical" look should not be used for a site >> whose purpose is documentation, but, a font that is very easy to >> read. > > Perhaps one may argue about what kind of fonts is best to read, but > certainly Garamond is perfectly well legible?
I don't think we should specify non-free fonts. That would make LilyPond's web site work better on people having installed non-free fonts than on systems which do not. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ bug-lilypond mailing list bug-lilypond@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-lilypond
