Tootfinder

I have a ten-year-old post about typefaces for dyslexia to which I’ve added two 2016 links:
• https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5629233/
•

The effect of a specialized dyslexia font, OpenDyslexic, on reading rate and accuracy
A single-subject alternating treatment design was used to investigate the extent to which a specialized dyslexia font, OpenDyslexic, impacted reading rate or accuracy compared to two commonly used fonts when used with elementary students identified ...

Finally, what Xia & Lindell call a "separation problem" is, in our view, a feature of our approach and not a bug.
If, e.g., all languages in a family are polysynthetic (or none are), that’s not a statistical artefact – it’s the signal. The outcome is well associated with genealogy, showing that family membership captures someth genuinely informative about the process. When the model finds that family explains a large share of the variance, that's not a failure–it's evidence that phylogenetic structure dominates the pattern.
So while Xia & Lindell insist that "autocorrelation due to relationships and distance cannot be captured in family or regional-level analyses", we see that as an empirical question – and we treated it as one.
The real test is whether a mixed model that explicitly represents phylogeny and geography performs worse than their alternative, where the entire shared history of languages and environments is effectively collapsed into a single dimension (an eigenvector).
In other words: we model relationships – Xia & Lindell summarise them into one number per language.