Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I am soon going to include a new set of Bigelow and Holmes Luxi
> (formerly Lucidux) fonts in the tree.
>
> The new fonts have a larger character repertoire than the version
> currently in the tree. Unlike the old fonts, which were in Type 1
> format, the new fonts are TrueType.
>
> For various reasons, Charles Bigelow is unable at this time to provide
> us with hinted Type 1 versions of these fonts. Thus, I feel that it
> may be useful to keep the old versions in the tree.
>
> I can see three ways of dealing with this:
>
> 1. remove the old Lucidux fonts;
> 2. include both the old fonts and the new fonts, but keep them under
> separate names;
> 3. include both the new and the old fonts under the same names, but
> put the new fonts first in the font path so as to make sure that they
> are the ones visible to the user in a default configuration.
How does the visual quality compare?
A while back I enabled Mozilla to use outline scaled fonts. I
set the code to use an outline scaled font if there was not a
bitmap font of the _exact_ size. I and others noted that the
visual quality was poorer.
--
Brian Stell
_______________________________________________
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
