[Moving to "Wikimedia" product as this request is about settings / configuration of the website, not about the codebase of the WebFonts extension itself.]

Extension setup requests are normally not high priority.

> setting back to normal.

Can someone perform this please?

[ Taking this bug. ]

[ Set temporarily shellpolicy, as the URL points only to a vote without a discussion - I'll check more in depth the discussion process later. ]

If I've well understood:

(1) Someone reports an issue with Webfonts - http://www.mediafire.com/view/?99adz5jmuhn3umk#

(2) Immediately follows, without a discussion, a vote to disable the extension

Is that true or did you discuss the issue too elsewhere?

Could you ask Haider90 to give more information in bug 47810 (browser, OS names and versions for example)?

Several users have reported that this extension is causing issues of display. On the same page of the vote, sections 4 and 12 address the same problem, only but to mention a few. Most users seem to agree with the decision.

(In reply to comment #6)

(1) Someone reports an issue with Webfonts -
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?99adz5jmuhn3umk#

Is that the only issue, or are there also other problems?

In which browser does that happen?

(In reply to comment #9)

(In reply to comment #6)

(1) Someone reports an issue with Webfonts -
http://www.mediafire.com/view/?99adz5jmuhn3umk#

Is that the only issue, or are there also other problems?

In which browser does that happen?

Another issues is that the Amiri font [currently by default] requires a certain line height, font size [...] which do not suit other fonts, namely the widely used Arial - https://ar.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=9816230&oldid=9810136

(In reply to comment #10)

Another issues is that the Amiri font [currently by default] requires a
certain
line height, font size [...] which do not suit other fonts, namely the widely
used Arial - https://ar.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=9816230&oldid=9810136

Thanks.

If these problems will be fixed, is it OK to leave it enabled?

And again, do you know in which browser does the problem shown in http://www.mediafire.com/view/?99adz5jmuhn3umk# happen?

This could take a while, and many users do not prefer using the Amiri font. Maybe it would be better to disable the extension, since it has multiple issues and dealing with them could take a while.

Zack: Again, could you please tell us:
In which browser (and version) does that happen?

Haider said this occurs in Firefox 20.0.1 and Chrome 26.0.1410.64 m.

Any actions here?

(In reply to comment #15)

Any actions here?

No, for instance you didn't really answer this question :) :

(comment #11)

If these problems will be fixed, is it OK to leave it enabled?

Another action I suggest you is to add information to bug 47810 so that other people can see the issue you describe. So far we have only a screenshot out of context with very little information, and for instance I can't see that problem anywhere with Firefox.
As usual, http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~sgtatham/bugs.html

cipherswiki wrote:

(comment #11)

If these problems will be fixed, is it OK to leave it enabled?

Yes. Unless, new issues came up after the change is made, but this is very unlikely to happen.

As stated above, the main issue is esthetic (the mentioned screenshot is an extreme case), that is most users feel comfortable reading their system font more than the Amiri font which is used as default in the extension.

WebFonts has been superseded by ULS. Yet the community seem not to appreciate much the automatic choice of fonts.
Is it technically possible to set the system font by default in ULS? If it is the case, this bug report would be terminated, and a new one opened.

(In reply to comment #18)
ULS was installed instead of WebFonts, so, I guess we can close this ticket. Please file the request to use system font as default in ULS in a separate bug.