<h1 id="typekit-and-legibility">Typekit and Legibility</h1>

<p>I got into a conversation about <a href="http://typekit.com">Typekit</a> on Twitter the other day, and <a href="http://po-ru.com">Paul Battley</a> hinted that he <a href="http://twitter.com/threedaymonk/status/7275934259">didn&rsquo;t really see the point</a>:</p>

<p>[snip 'tweet' cannot be found]</p>

<p>Typekit doesn&rsquo;t seem to work on Chrome-based browsers, or Mobile Safari (so that means the iPhone, and probably Android). That&rsquo;s a shame, but I expect that Typekit will address the issue, if only for the desktop-bound browsers, but Paul&rsquo;s comment about <em>legibility</em> got me thinking.</p>

<p>I suspect what Paul thinks is important is getting to the meat of a site - the actual information - without any unnecessary hinderances. It&rsquo;s a goal I can fully support.</p>

<h2 id="its-web-20-right">It&rsquo;s Web 2.0, right?</h2>

<p>Good websites let you consume their data in any way you like. This one has an <a href="http://interblah.net/feed.xml">atom feed</a>, but you can also slurpt the HTML and do what you like with that. All of the content is available <a href="/typekit-and-legibility">individually</a> (or just the <a href="/typekit-and-legibility.text">text</a>, or even the <a href="/typekit-and-legibility.raw">raw snip</a>), and the full posts are in the feed, so you&rsquo;re genuinely able to consume this site in any way you please. However, if you actually visit directly in a browser, I have an opportunity to add an extra dimension to that experience, aesthetically. That&rsquo;s what Typekit assists with.</p>

<p>It&rsquo;s certainly easy to produce a difficult-to-read version of this content using <a href="http://typekit.com">Typekit</a>, and I may have achieved just that here. I think the point is that this is my domain (in both senses of the word), and it&rsquo;s employed as a medium for expressing myself, both intellectually and visually.</p>


