>>Le lundi 10 novembre 2008 ? 16:33 +0000, Dave Crossland a ?crit : >> 2008/11/10 James Weiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> > >> > Are there no font formats that can carry easily accessible meta data like >> > ID3 does for mp3s etc? >> >> TrueType and OpenType do this easily enough; the problem is getting >> users to put the metadata there. > >And keep it up to date / accurate > >Even when there is info in font metadata we often can not trust it >because it has been wrong so many times before. > >Countless fonts say they're at version 1.0 even when we see them revised >many times. > >Countless fonts make incomplete of plain false licensing statements in >their metadata (Google Droid is just the last high-visibility example). > >I'll take a detached license file and a versionned archive any day in >the stead of their metadata equivallents. One can be trusted the other ? >not. The fact is, as a "font librarian", one needs to examine all these things, from external webpages related to the font to licensing statements in the metadata and inside the zip file to what the author enters into OFLB when doing an upload.
Also, having the "font sense" an experienced graphic designer will often have may help, and/or using: _http://www.myfonts.com/WhatTheFont/_ (http://www.myfonts.com/WhatTheFont/) Ever wanted to find a font just like the one used by certain publications, corporations, or ad campaigns? Well now you can, using our WhatTheFont font recognition system. Upload a scanned image of the font and instantly find the closest matches in our database. If WhatTheFont can’t figure it out, you can submit your image to the _WhatTheFont Forum_ (http://www.myfonts.com/WhatTheFont/forum/) where cloak-draped font enthusiasts around the world will help you out! _http://www.identifont.com/_ (http://www.identifont.com/) Welcome to Identifont, the largest independent directory of typefaces on the Internet, with information about fonts from 532 publishers and 143 vendors. _http://www.fontscape.com/_ (http://www.fontscape.com/) Same company as identifont - more geared towards picking a font for some use. Using these tools takes time and patience. As font librarians we do need to do it, we need to remove any commercially (or otherwise incompatible) licensed fonts from OFLB. I personally have found commercial fonts on OFLB in the past & emailed rejon to have them removed. But there may be more! Remember it's not about having the most fonts, *it's about the license* OFLB is NOT a copy of DAFONT.COM, which has thousands of "free fonts" with many pirated ones, "freeware fonts" -- which are not free for changes, and all sorts of other license questionable stuff, we need to vet every font on oflb. I have sent dafont.com emails trying to get them to separate GNU GPL and Public Domain into different categories, to no avail. They list: (Public domain / GNU GPL) as one of their main font categories. I've audited many of the fonts listed in this category (trying to find things which could be added to OFLB) and found mostly commercial fonts relabeled as this, freeware fonts & other questionably licensed fonts in there. It was actually pretty disappointing to go through so many fonts and find nearly nothing with clear / useful licenses I thought could be added to my new project, oflb.com. DaFont.com official policy: >Are all fonts free of charge? > >The fonts presented on this website are their authors' property, and are either freeware, shareware, demo >versions or public domain. The licence mentioned above the download button is just an indication. Please >look at the readme-files in the zips or check the indicated author's website for details, and contact him/her >if in doubt. If no author/licence is indicated that's because we don't have information, that doesn't mean it's >free. ^^^^^^^^^^^^ With an official policy like that, it's no wonder their archive is full of who knows what licensed fonts. I've also found some fonts with more than one open source license. I do find this troubling, as the terms are different, and it creates confusion for the people interested in remixing. I think a good example of confusing licenses is: user zeimusu's fonts. The .TTF versions are public domain, but the .OTF versions of the same fonts are SIL OFL. I would like to see an "other" image added to the license category for when people upload files under licenses which may be acceptable/free but not one of the "main" licenses. FF **************AOL Search: Your one stop for directions, recipes and all other Holiday needs. Search Now. (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100000075x1212792382x1200798498/aol?redir=http://searchblog.aol.com/2008/11/04/happy-holidays-from -aol-search/?ncid=emlcntussear00000001)
