Droid font body text
The visually smaller glyphs of Noto will be significantly harder to distinguish on the device.
![droid font body text droid font body text](https://imgs3.fontbrain.com/imgs/9e/94/decf013d3e2c9adcc0b97cc5ce44/sp-720x400-333333-penultimate@2x.png)
They combine serif, sans-serif and cursive fonts, meant to be used for headings and body text. You can modify how your HTML text appears in many ways using CSS. How text is formatted affects how readable your designs and webpages are. It will be much more readable for users with small, limited-resolution screens. Here are some great font combinations ready to be used in your site. Choosing the right font is an important first step in making your website usable and accessible. Therefore, if the Droid Arabic Naskh UI font fits acceptably within the design of the Gaia widgets and UI, I think we should probably prefer it. It does not have the same kind of "body" for the line as a whole, and the distinguishing features that readers need to recognize - in particular, the patterns of one, two or three dots - are very small compared to the distinctive features of Latin glyphs. This is largely because the Latin glyphs consistently fill at least the ex-height, so that the body of the text line is very clear and solid, whereas Arabic is based on a single horizontal line from which glyph features project up and/or down. It supports 100+ Latin-based languages and pairs well with Abril Fatface, Karla. Lato is an open source, sans-serif font originally developed by ukasz Dziedzic. It pairs well with Source Sans Pro, Fira Sans, Karla, Hind, and Inconsolata. IMO, the relationship between Arabic and Latin text is much better with the Droid font if we switch to Noto, the Arabic becomes visually very small and weak, and the couple of English items in the list seem quite overpowering in comparison. Inspired by an old neighborhood, Montserrat was created by Julieta Ulanovsky in 2010. (In both this and the previous image, Droid Arabic Naskh UI is on the left, and Noto Naskh Arabic on the right.)
![droid font body text droid font body text](https://avibisram.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Droid+Serif.jpg)
Details Here's a further comparison, in this case with several English items also present on the screen to give a better sense of how the Latin and Arabic fonts compare. The reduced default line spacing is also very apparent in the "Bluetooth" item, where the gap between the two lines of text is greatly reduced compared to the non-UI variant of the font.ĭroidArabicNaskhUI-vs-NotoNaskhArabic-2.png I suppose this might be considered a "distortion" of the script in order to fit within the vertical space, but my impression is that it's a fairly common design pattern in modern typefaces that are intended to fit into a tighter, more Latin-centric line spacing. In the UI font, the connection from the preceding letter first rises up above the baseline, so that the ي does not push down as far below as it would in the non-UI version of the font. Details Here's a comparison of Droid Arabic Naskh UI vs Noto Naskh Arabic.Ĭontrasting this with attachment 8588041, we can see how the "UI" variant of the font has reduced the vertical space it requires - perhaps the most striking example is the final ي character in the translation of "Geolocation" (above "Wi-Fi"). DroidArabicNaskhUI-vs-NotoNaskhArabic-1.png These fonts are easier to read on screens and at a distance during presentations, and they support a wide variety of languages and weights.