On 13 Dec, Keith Packard wrote: >> Server-side fonts were added to Xft to support legacy X servers without the > Render extension. I suggest that instead of using server-side fonts, Xft > should rasterize glyphs with FreeType and draw with the Render extension > where available and using the core protocol for legacy servers without > Render support. > > I'd implement both AA and non-AA paths, making this perform reasonably well > over networks while also providing extended capabilities for servers not > able to move to the Render extension. I've done client-side non-AA text in > the core protocol in the past and have found it acceptable, even over > relatively low speed links (128K ISDN).
Excellent idea. Can we also coordinate with the major applications groups to reach a consensus on font management? The underlying font management goal should be to reach the same ease of use that is presently achieved in the Windows world. X is the logical mechanism for the distribution of a baseline font management even when it moves into applications space. Moving this outside the server gives us a better chance of proper support for the more difficult languages. I had been wondering how X could ever deal effectively with the "consonant in the middle" and "two dimensional placement" languages. Even the simple issue of how to match the needs of traditional Chinese looked extremely hard. For those who are unaware, traditional Chinese adds several new characters and glyphs every day. These are managed locally at sites by placing them into temporary character slots assigned for local characterset extensions, and then updated at intervals when official character encodings are defined for the new characters. This does all sorts of ugly things to data exchange, X protocols, etc. Moving character->glyph out to application space at least solves the X portion of the problem. R Horn _______________________________________________ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
