>>>>> "WL" == Werner LEMBERG <[email protected]> writes:
WL> However, it seems that you (completely?) replace the current WL> gray-level hinting stuff with cleartype-like hinting. Is this WL> intended? Shouldn't this be three different `modes'? Bi-level, WL> standard gray-level, and cleartype-like? [ I was going to reply directly with this, but Werner's question is too relevant not to quote. -JimC ] I tried out the patch, installing it as my system freetype. My fontconfig setup suggests the use of the legacy filter for instructed glyf fonts, and the default filter for autofit and light-autofit fonts. I have cairo patched to follow that suggestion, so gtk apps, in particular, do just that. I beleive qt apps also do so, but i may be mis-remembering that. XFT, on the other hand, continues to do its own thing, which is what the legacy filter was designed to emulate. And my primary UI fonts are DejaVu Serif and DejaVu Sans Mono, sized such that the stems are one pixel wide when instructed. With you patch, the fonts look very poor. It increases colour fringing to the point of distraction. I even tried with the default filter instead of the legacy filter. I very much like the idea, but I had to go back. I think the new hinting should be in addition to, and not instead of the current code. Part of the issue, of course, is that the fonts I care about and the fonts you are testing against are almost disjoint sets. So before going back I did run ftview an ftdiff on a few of the fonts which came with the laptop. (It arrived with XP.) The most interesting result of that test was that PALA.ttf (Palatino Linotype, version 1.40) was invisible with your patch. -JimC -- James Cloos <[email protected]> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6 _______________________________________________ Freetype mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype
