Skip to content

Add Carlito and Caladea #1441

@cssobral2013

Description

@cssobral2013

https://github.com/huertatipografica/Caladea

Carlito has no github, to date

Activity

added this to the Add New Families milestone on Feb 6, 2018
davelab6

davelab6 commented on Feb 6, 2018

@davelab6
Member

There are a few more families that were part of this set.

laerm0

laerm0 commented on Jul 10, 2018

@laerm0
Contributor

Were there? Arimo, Tinos, and Cousine are already on GF.

m4rc1e

m4rc1e commented on Mar 6, 2020

@m4rc1e
Collaborator

Caladea is now on Google Fonts, https://fonts.google.com/specimen/Caladea?query=caladea

Carlito coming soon.

mfwitten

mfwitten commented on Jun 30, 2020

@mfwitten
Contributor

What is the reason for Carlito's delay, especially given the importance of its metric-compatibility with the ubiquitous Calibri?

I don't intend to poke anybody; I'm just genuinely curious.

From what I can tell:

m4rc1e

m4rc1e commented on Jun 30, 2020

@m4rc1e
Collaborator

@vv-monsalve Did we work on Carlito at any pooint? I can't remember.

vv-monsalve

vv-monsalve commented on Jun 30, 2020

@vv-monsalve
Collaborator

@vv-monsalve Did we work on Carlito at any pooint? I can't remember.

No, we only worked on Caladea last year, I didn't know about Carlito.

mfwitten

mfwitten commented on Jul 10, 2020

@mfwitten
Contributor

The ChromiumOS source says:

  • The Carlito font was designed by Łukasz Dziedzic (@typoland).

  • The license is OFL 1.1

  • The distribution files are gotten from here, and have not changed since 2013-09-20.

  • Sources for the font files don't appear to be anywhere readily accessible, as far as I can tell; and, nobody seems to care.

Perhaps @typoland would be willing to help move this issue along.

mfwitten

mfwitten commented on Jul 22, 2020

@mfwitten
Contributor

The file CONTRIBUTING.md lists some high-level criteria for including a font family in the Google Fonts project; here are the high-level criteria that need to be investigated for the inclusion of Carlito:

Criterion Satisfied Comment
Google CLA ? The Carlito font is attributed to Łukasz Dziedzic (@typoland), whose Lato font is already included in the Google Fonts project. Also, Google already includes Carlito in Chom*OS. This should be straightforward to resolve.
Font Name
is not a
registered
trademark
? According to the USPTO’s TESS service, there is only one “live” registered trademark with “carlito” as the word mark: US Registration Number 3082671 (US Serial Number 78622082).

However, the registered rendition of the word “carlito” does not use the Carlito font that is being discussed in this GitHub issue.
Hinting ? Carlito is supposedly based on Lato, and has long been included in ChromeOS and FLOSS OSes where Freetype is common; this suggests it has hinting, and probably benefited from ttfautohint.
Supports
Google Fonts
2016 Plus

glyph set
? The Carlito font has been included with ChromeOS since 2013, and has not been changed since that time. The Carlito font is supposedly based on Lato, and thus very likely meets this requirement.
Active
development
The font has not changed since its debut in ChromeOS; the supposed author is unresponsive about the matter.
On Github
or similar
? The font binaries are included in the Chromium project.
Corresponding
sources
Apparently, there are no readily available human-readable sources that correspond to the binaries. Perhaps Google or the supposed author (Łukasz Dziedzic) would be willing to make those available; or, perhaps the binaries can simply be “decompiled” and added to the appropriate repository somewhere.
Font Bakery
checks
There are no corresponding sources.
Scripted build
process
There are no corresponding sources.
README.md There are no corresponding sources.
profile.txt There are no corresponding sources.
your-name.jpg There are no corresponding sources.
DESCRIPTION
.en_us.html
There are no corresponding sources.
Uses fontmake There are no corresponding sources.

All High-Level Criteria

Criterion Satisfied Comment
Original The Carlito font is a variation of Lato.
Good quality Google has included the Carlito font in ChromeOS since 2013.
OFL 1.1 That’s what Google claims.
No reserved
names
No reservation appears to be made.
Google CLA ? The Carlito font is attributed to Łukasz Dziedzic (@typoland), whose Lato font is already included in the Google Fonts project. Also, Google already includes Carlito in Chom*OS. This should be straightforward to resolve.
TTF format
All font files
have the same
Unicode
character
set
The Carlito font is supposedly based on Lato, and thus very likely meets this requirement.
Font Name
is not a
full formal
noun
“Carlito” is not even a name of the supposed copyright holder, Łukasz Dziedzic.
Font Name
is not a
registered
trademark
? According to the USPTO’s TESS service, there is only one “live” registered trademark with “carlito” as the word mark: US Registration Number 3082671 (US Serial Number 78622082).

However, the registered rendition of the word “carlito” does not use the Carlito font that is being discussed in this GitHub issue.
Font Name
has no
initials or
abbreviations
Font Name
makes no
reference
to a
language
or writing
system
Font Name
is simple
and
unique
The name “carlito” is unknown to fontdata.com.
Hinting ? Carlito is supposedly based on Lato, and has long been included in ChromeOS and FLOSS OSes where Freetype is common; this suggests it has hinting, and probably benefited from ttfautohint.
Supports
Google Fonts
2016 Plus

glyph set
? The Carlito font has been included with ChromeOS since 2013, and has not been changed since that time. The Carlito font is supposedly based on Lato, and thus very likely meets this requirement.
Active
development
The font has not changed since its debut in ChromeOS; the supposed author is unresponsive about the matter.
On Github
or similar
? The font binaries are included in the Chromium project.
Corresponding
sources
Apparently, there are no readily available human-readable sources that correspond to the binaries. Perhaps Google or the supposed author (Łukasz Dziedzic) would be willing to make those available; or, perhaps the binaries can simply be “decompiled” and added to the appropriate repository somewhere.
Font Bakery
checks
There are no corresponding sources.
Scripted build
process
There are no corresponding sources.
README.md There are no corresponding sources.
profile.txt There are no corresponding sources.
your-name.jpg There are no corresponding sources.
DESCRIPTION
.en_us.html
There are no corresponding sources.
Uses fontmake There are no corresponding sources.
raffaem

raffaem commented on Dec 23, 2020

@raffaem

Tried to contact them about Carlito, hope they will answer ... if it's not open source there will be resistance in including it in certain distributions

twardoch

twardoch commented on Dec 23, 2020

@twardoch
Contributor

The Carlito fonts were derived from Lato in a semi-automated semi-manual fashion, with some work done in FontLab Studio 5, some work done on the binary level, using proprietary software that is not publicly available.

The goal was to match the metrics and kerning of an existing font, so there were some tests, iterations and hackery involved. The production process was “one-off“.

Basically, there never were any “sources” from which the fonts could be re-built. I wrote some ad-hoc scripts for the process but they were never organized and never intended for release. They would not have benefitted the public anyway because they used now-defunct proprietary libraries which are no longer maintained by the authors.

The current TTFs are the best-available sources. I mean, were I to do any work on those fonts, I’d use the TTFs, as they're the only ones that fulfil the goal of having the metrics compatibility that the fonts were created for.

twardoch

twardoch commented on Dec 23, 2020

@twardoch
Contributor

BTW, the original author of Calibri, Luc(as) de Groot, has publicly raised objections over whether Carlito is “original”. Whether the spacing and kerning of a font is subject to copyright has been the subject of some debate, and I think the concern is valid.

The Carlito fonts are “original” in terms of copyright law, I think, but are certainly not something that one might call “original design”.

I don't think Carlito is worthy of inclusion in Google Fonts. It’s a font in which the letters of the original design (Lato) have been algorithmically adjusted to fit the widths of another design. There was no quality design involved in the process. So the result is just an ugly Frankenstein monster — it's neither Lato nor Calibri.

Carlito may have fit its purpose for which it was created, but users should not be encouraged to use it beyond that.

twardoch

twardoch commented on Dec 23, 2020

@twardoch
Contributor

Ps. As you're aware, quite a few acquisitions happened in the font industry in the past years (Monotype, Bistream, FontShop, URW). These companies had some old proprietary tools that could work on the TTF level, for example Incubator Pro: https://vimeo.com/193433222

I have used some of such tools in the production process. Because these tools are a “black box”, any previous, intermediate steps in the build process of Carlito aren't really “sources”. I have also deleted many of those steps because I was not developing a “replayable” build process but a very specific set of deliverables.

I didn’t even document the build process for myself — because of the very specific brief. As a result, the TTFs are the best “sources”, because they best reflect the main point why Carlito was created — metric compatibility with another font.

If you want “higher-level” sources, https://github.com/latofonts/lato-source are such sources.

28 remaining items

added this to the 2022 Q2 milestone on Dec 10, 2021
davelab6

davelab6 commented on Feb 24, 2022

@davelab6
Member

Thanks @ronaldtse I have finally merged this PR. @twardoch PTAL

ronaldtse

ronaldtse commented on Feb 24, 2022

@ronaldtse

Thank you very much @davelab6 ! Very glad to be able to use the font from its rightful location 😉

moved this from Todo to In Dev / PR Merged in Google Fontson Mar 9, 2023
added
II AcceptedNon-commissioned projects that are accepted for onboarding
and removed
II Submissionpending proposal for non-commissioned fonts suggested in the issue tracker
on Mar 23, 2023
moved this from In Dev / PR Merged to Live in Google Fontson Jun 7, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

Labels

I New FontII AcceptedNon-commissioned projects that are accepted for onboarding

Type

No type

Projects

Status

Live

Relationships

None yet

    Development

    Participants

    @ronaldtse@davelab6@twardoch@mfwitten@Ganton

    Issue actions