Pros of Source Han Sans

• More comprehensive character coverage, including rare CJK ideographs
• Includes multiple weights and styles for greater design flexibility
• Collaborative development with input from multiple type foundries

Cons of Source Han Sans

• Larger file sizes due to extensive character set
• May require more system resources to render complex glyphs
• Less frequent updates compared to Noto CJK

Code Comparison

Source Han Sans:

@font-face {
  font-family: 'Source Han Sans';
  src: url('SourceHanSans-Regular.otf') format('opentype');
  font-weight: normal;
  font-style: normal;
}

Noto CJK:

@font-face {
  font-family: 'Noto Sans CJK';
  src: url('NotoSansCJK-Regular.otf') format('opentype');
  font-weight: normal;
  font-style: normal;
}

Both repositories provide high-quality CJK fonts, but Source Han Sans offers a more extensive character set and stylistic options, while Noto CJK focuses on broader language support and more frequent updates. The code usage is similar, with the main difference being the font family name specified in the CSS.

Pros of noto-fonts

• Covers a wider range of scripts and languages globally
• More frequent updates and contributions
• Includes variable font versions for many scripts

Cons of noto-fonts

• Larger repository size due to comprehensive coverage
• May require more time to navigate and find specific fonts
• Some scripts might have less specialized attention compared to noto-cjk

Code comparison

noto-fonts:

src/
├── latin
├── arabic
├── devanagari
└── ...

noto-cjk:

src/
├── NotoSansCJK-Black.otf
├── NotoSansCJK-Bold.otf
├── NotoSansCJK-Light.otf
└── ...

The noto-fonts repository has a more complex directory structure, organizing fonts by script, while noto-cjk has a flatter structure focused specifically on CJK (Chinese, Japanese, Korean) fonts.

noto-fonts provides a comprehensive solution for global typography needs, covering numerous scripts and languages. It offers more frequent updates and includes variable font versions. However, its large size may make navigation challenging.

noto-cjk, on the other hand, specializes in CJK fonts, providing a more focused and potentially optimized solution for East Asian typography. It has a simpler structure but may lack the broader language support found in noto-fonts.

Pros of noto-cjk

• Comprehensive coverage of CJK (Chinese, Japanese, Korean) characters
• Regular updates and maintenance
• Well-documented and organized repository structure

Cons of noto-cjk

• Large file sizes due to extensive character set
• May require more system resources for rendering
• Potential complexity in integrating with certain applications

Code Comparison

While both repositories are font-related and don't contain typical code samples, we can compare their directory structures:

noto-cjk:

/NotoSansCJK-Black.ttc
/NotoSansCJK-Bold.ttc
/NotoSansCJK-DemiLight.ttc
/NotoSansCJK-Light.ttc
/NotoSansCJK-Medium.ttc

noto-cjk:

/Sans/OTC/
/Sans/SubsetOTF/
/Serif/OTC/
/Serif/SubsetOTF/
/LICENSE

The noto-cjk repository appears to have a more organized structure with separate directories for Sans and Serif fonts, as well as OTC (OpenType Collection) and SubsetOTF formats. This organization may make it easier for users to find specific font variants and styles.

Pros of Source Han Serif

• More comprehensive character coverage, including rare CJK ideographs
• Includes multiple weights and styles for greater design flexibility
• Collaborative development with input from multiple type foundries

Cons of Source Han Serif

• Larger file sizes due to extensive character set
• May require more system resources to render complex glyphs
• Less frequent updates compared to Noto CJK

Code Comparison

Source Han Serif:

@font-face {
  font-family: 'Source Han Serif';
  src: url('SourceHanSerif-Regular.otf') format('opentype');
}

Noto CJK:

@font-face {
  font-family: 'Noto Sans CJK';
  src: url('NotoSansCJK-Regular.otf') format('opentype');
}

Both repositories provide high-quality CJK fonts, but Source Han Serif offers a more extensive character set and stylistic options at the cost of larger file sizes. Noto CJK, while more compact, focuses on essential characters and receives more frequent updates. The code implementation for both fonts is similar, with the main difference being the font family name used in CSS declarations.

Pros of Sarasa-Gothic

• Offers a wider range of language support, including CJK, Latin, and Cyrillic scripts
• Provides multiple weight variants and styles for each font
• Includes monospaced versions of the fonts, suitable for coding and terminal use

Cons of Sarasa-Gothic

• Smaller community and less frequent updates compared to Noto CJK
• May have less extensive documentation and support resources
• Potentially less optimized for specific CJK languages compared to Noto's specialized fonts

Code Comparison

While both projects are font repositories, they don't contain significant amounts of code. However, here's a comparison of their build processes:

Noto CJK:

python3 build_ttc.py --output Noto-CJK.ttc --input NotoSansCJK-Regular.otf NotoSerifCJK-Regular.otf

Sarasa-Gothic:

npm run build ttf::SGo

Sarasa-Gothic uses a Node.js-based build system, while Noto CJK relies on Python scripts for font compilation. This difference reflects their distinct development approaches and tooling preferences.

Pros of noto-emoji

• Specialized for emoji characters, providing a comprehensive set of colorful and expressive icons
• Regular updates to include new emoji standards and Unicode versions
• Includes tools for building and processing emoji fonts

Cons of noto-emoji

• Limited to emoji characters, not suitable for general text rendering
• Larger file size due to color information and detailed designs
• May require additional processing or support for proper display in some applications

Code comparison

noto-emoji:

def get_emoji_name(filename):
    return path.splitext(path.basename(filename))[0]

def emoji_names(srcdir):
    return [get_emoji_name(f) for f in glob.glob(path.join(srcdir, '*.png'))]

noto-cjk:

def get_cjk_info(filename):
    return path.splitext(path.basename(filename))[0].split('-')

def cjk_names(srcdir):
    return [get_cjk_info(f) for f in glob.glob(path.join(srcdir, '*.otf'))]

Both repositories are part of the Noto fonts project, but they serve different purposes. noto-emoji focuses on providing colorful emoji characters, while noto-cjk is designed for CJK (Chinese, Japanese, and Korean) text rendering. The code snippets show how each project handles file naming and information extraction, reflecting their specialized nature.