Kaixo! On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 05:44:13PM +0400, Vadim Plessky wrote:
> | You should also decide on an extenson name other than .ttf, to avoid > | that those bitmap only ttf files get confused wwith real scalable > | fonts by people out there, otherwise there would be a lot of bad > | consequences. > > It seems to me that .ttf extension is o.k. for such fonts. I disagree. Or have you tested with all programs that use TTF fonts directly, and tested also in other operating systems (Windows, MacOS, BeOS,...) and other graphical environments (like Berlin) that those fonts will work and won't break anything ? I'm afraid that a vast majority of programs and OS currently using TTF simple expect them to always have scalable glyphs; what will happen if one of such programs tries to use a bitmap only font for displaying at a size for xhich there are no bitmaps embedded ? > But indeed Qt3/KDE3 and GNOME2/GTK2 should be patched/tested against such > fonts. There are a lot of utilities out there that use directly TTFs; from little utilities creating images for web counters, to programs doing 3D rendering of text,... and don't forget also other non-X11 environments; very bad press will happen if fonts are disseminated that cause problems (and they probably will be disseminated if people think they are just normal TTF fonts). So, using a different extension name will solve a lot of trouble. -- Ki ça vos våye bén, Pablo Saratxaga http://chanae.stben.be/pablo/ PGP Key available, key ID: 0xD9B85466 [you can write me in Walloon, Spanish, French, English, Italian or Portuguese]
msg01080/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
