Presumably they wanted to be able to include both “Google” the the Google logo on the same pages, and a font that can do both is a reasonable way to do that.
Creating the font was reasonable, it was the choice to use it outside of their own web pages, and especially to apply it to user controlled text, that was a bag call.
I don’t see this as anyhow reasonable still. This eg will break all the screen readers as well. If you really want to do this, use specialized font and a single unprintable Unicode character instead. Like font awesome does.
Reading out “google logo ligature” in a font reader seems more informative than skipping the logo entirely, which is what an unprintable unicode character would do.
I agree. I was not precise in my statement—what I wanted to say was that if for some reason they are trying to use it in place of picture, as a decoration (which I can’t really see why), then this would be the approach. Still, I think using ligature for the word Google is the right approach.
Realistically wouldn’t that mean having two versions of the font, one with the ligature and one without? Perhaps they do have two versions and some developer just used the wrong one at some point. Seems like it would be an easy mistake to make.
Presumably they wanted to be able to include both “Google” the the Google logo on the same pages, and a font that can do both is a reasonable way to do that.
Creating the font was reasonable, it was the choice to use it outside of their own web pages, and especially to apply it to user controlled text, that was a bag call.
I don’t see this as anyhow reasonable still. This eg will break all the screen readers as well. If you really want to do this, use specialized font and a single unprintable Unicode character instead. Like font awesome does.
Reading out “google logo ligature” in a font reader seems more informative than skipping the logo entirely, which is what an unprintable unicode character would do.
I agree. I was not precise in my statement—what I wanted to say was that if for some reason they are trying to use it in place of picture, as a decoration (which I can’t really see why), then this would be the approach. Still, I think using ligature for the word Google is the right approach.
Realistically wouldn’t that mean having two versions of the font, one with the ligature and one without? Perhaps they do have two versions and some developer just used the wrong one at some point. Seems like it would be an easy mistake to make.