Pablo Saratxaga <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> 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 ?
I'm pretty sure Microsoft ships a number of .ttf files with only bitmaps and
no outlines with Windows... it's nothing revolutionary and nothing
robust software doesn't have to handle already.
And to the extent that most font handling for open-source handling goes
through FreeType and (increasingly) through fontconfig, there is really
very little difference between a .ttf file with only bitmaps, a
.ttf file with only bitmaps called something else, and a .pcf file ...
the software can encounter such fonts in any of the cases.
Regards,
Owen
_______________________________________________
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
