[linux] change default monospace font to Monospace

[linux] change default monospace font to Monospace

Courier New looks bad on Linux. See bug for details.

BUG=142485
Committed: http://src.chromium.org/viewvc/chrome?view=rev&revision=151791

[Evan Stade, 2012-08-14 18:30:29]

justification is on the bug. I think 'monospace' uses the system default and
appears to match what firefox 14 does.

[tony, 2012-08-15 00:13:30]

Firefox also uses 'serif' and 'sans-serif' for serif and sans serif fonts.  If
we're going to switch to 'monospace', should we do the same for the others?

Note that this does have a web compat cost.  E.g., text will wrap in slightly
different spots which will probably break some web sites designed in IE, but
maybe Linux users are already used to that?

[Evan Stade, 2012-08-15 00:29:49]

On 2012/08/15 00:13:30, tony wrote:
> Firefox also uses 'serif' and 'sans-serif' for serif and sans serif fonts.  If
> we're going to switch to 'monospace', should we do the same for the others?
> 
> Note that this does have a web compat cost.  E.g., text will wrap in slightly
> different spots which will probably break some web sites designed in IE, but
> maybe Linux users are already used to that?

I'm more afraid of the web compat problem for the normal fonts
(serif/sans-serif). Perhaps a site would specify sans-serif for some text and
arial for some other text, a discrepancy that goes unnoticed given the current
defaults but looks odd if you change defaults. But the monospace does look a ton
better than courier new in terms of readability, so it's worth the risk imo.

[jungshik at Google, 2012-08-15 00:35:50]

LGTM

If you specify 'Monospace', what's actually used depends on what user/OS has in
fontconfig configuration files. For monospace generic family, it may not matter
much in terms of web compat.  So, I'm fine with this change. An alternative is
to specify a concrete font like 'DejaVu Sans Mono'. 

Firefox uses 'serif' and 'sans-serif' to defer the decision to fontconfig
configuration files even for serif and sans-serif generic families. I tend to
agree with Evan on the pros and cons of that approach. 


On 2012/08/15 00:29:49, Evan Stade wrote:
> On 2012/08/15 00:13:30, tony wrote:
> > Firefox also uses 'serif' and 'sans-serif' for serif and sans serif fonts. 
If
> > we're going to switch to 'monospace', should we do the same for the others?
> > 
> > Note that this does have a web compat cost.  E.g., text will wrap in
slightly
> > different spots which will probably break some web sites designed in IE, but
> > maybe Linux users are already used to that?
> 
> I'm more afraid of the web compat problem for the normal fonts
> (serif/sans-serif). Perhaps a site would specify sans-serif for some text and
> arial for some other text, a discrepancy that goes unnoticed given the current
> defaults but looks odd if you change defaults. But the monospace does look a
ton
> better than courier new in terms of readability, so it's worth the risk imo.

[tony, 2012-08-15 00:57:48]

Ok, let's try it.  No one uses Linux anyway, right?

LGTM.

[tony, 2012-08-15 00:58:32]

Nit: You might want to put part of the 'why' in the change description.

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-08-15 21:12:08]

CQ is trying da patch. Follow status at
https://chromium-status.appspot.com/cq/estade@chromium.org/10823319/4001

[commit-bot: I haz the power, 2012-08-15 23:52:07]

Change committed as 151791