Edit report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=52403&edit=1
ID: 52403
Updated by: h...@php.net
Reported by: h...@php.net
Summary: imagettfbbox/imagettftext "Could not read font"
error
-Status: Bogus
+Status: Open
Type: Bug
Package: GD related
Operating System: CentOS4
PHP Version: 5.2.13
Block user comment: N
Private report: N
Previous Comments:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2011-12-22 18:24:41] rpalkowski at cyberitas dot com
For what it's worth, I just encountered this exact problem and was also
thrown by the ambiguity of the warning message, and was barking up the
wrong tree for a while before I stumbled upon testing the validity of
the font file itself. There is clearly an actual semantic difference
between being able to open, and being able to parse or validate a file.
If you don't want to change "Could not read font", then the ambiguity
could be resolved by changing the other warning message to "Could not
open font".
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2010-10-19 21:25:38] h...@php.net
The issue is not between open and read.
imagettfbbox() says the file cannot be read.
is_readable() says the file can be read.
This is the issue. "Open" is never mentioned in the error.
The wording is poor, you are trying to dismiss it as bogus because you deem it
unimportant.
You seem to agree that the wording is ambiguous and can be improved, yet you
are choosing to ignore it. That is just rude, not polite.
Is it too much to ask to improve the wording in the name of clarity?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2010-10-19 20:50:53] paj...@php.net
Let me rephrase a last time, I won't change this error at this stage. So keep
this report as bogus as there is no bug here. The meaning of open and read are
clear.
I did not say that reporting issues is not valuable. I love bugs reports.
However you also have to consider polite negative replies, with arguments.
The gain (trying to replace the words open and read so users can understand the
difference between these two actions) is not enough in regard to the hassle
that it will introduce from a test point of view.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2010-10-19 20:40:12] h...@php.net
To confirm,
"could not find/read font" means the file is not readable.
"Could not read font" means what?
And you don't believe these errors are ambiguous?
There is clearly an issue with the error being too ambiguous. The gain would be
to improve the end user experience.
Or are we to assume that improvements are no longer worth reporting?
------------------------------------------------------------------------
[2010-10-19 18:29:43] paj...@php.net
The error if the file does not exist or cannot be open is "could not find/read
font".
The error when GD cannot (actually Freetype failed) read the font file is
"could not read font", which is perfectly correct. There is no bug here and I
won't change this error (will have to change in external GD as well, duplicate
tests, etc. for no gain).
------------------------------------------------------------------------
The remainder of the comments for this report are too long. To view
the rest of the comments, please view the bug report online at
https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=52403
--
Edit this bug report at https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=52403&edit=1
