Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
+1 Less words, more work. El 27/06/11 7:07, Keith Curtis escribió: > In order to succeed, a mass movement must develop at the earliest > moment a compact corporate organization and a capacity to integrate > all comers. > > —Eric Hoffer, American philosopher > > This discussion is interesting but it reminds me of people > re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Or, perhaps a better analogy > is where there are two battleships, one is 30x bigger and the other is > undermanned. In fact, there is only a skeleton crew so if there is a > problem in many areas of the ship, there is no one able to fix it. > Meanwhile, some of the crew are sitting on deck chairs discussing how > they'd like a better battleship, but they are at sea so it is not > possible now. > > I believe the best way to ensure TDF's success is for you to find a > crew to fix all of these as fast as possible: > http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Easy_Hacks > > Forks often take years to get going because they take years to get a > large enough of a team. That is a random list, but the sooner you can > fix those, the sooner you can fix other things including font > features. Fixing bugs is the way to be able to write features. People > can work anywhere they want, but that is the front door, and evidence > you need more. People with expertise already are valuable. It is good > is that you have people who are able to mentor others. Some forks > didn't even have that. You need to find enough people so you have > expertise over every line, which I don't think you have today. > > I also hope there is a crew hacking ribbon-like UIs in Python, one > working on server and web features, etc. If you want to succeed in a > decade, and you are mostly going to be volunteers, you need many, > focused on things that improve the product today. > > You can keep a positive attitude by remembering there is another > battleship that is 10x undermanned than you ;-) It says OpenOffice, > etc. on the side, but that is not the most important consideration. > > Kind regards, > > -Keith > http://keithcu.com/ > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Hi Davide, 2011/6/27 Davide Dozza : > > I've been working on OOo migrations since 2003. Especially for PA. I > think I'm not detached from the real world ;-) :o) > One thing it's what people wish, another what the law requires and yet > another is what technology offers. > > For a PA when a document has to be long-term archived only in a > electronic way, the Italian law requires PDF/A. Fidelity is a must. But we are not talking about document archiving here, are we? We are talking about round-tripping documents. > You have to keep in mind that there is a trade off between features and > fidelity. > > Because fidelity it's a question of rendering algorithms: more features > means more complexity for such algorithms. Yes > Therefore the more fidelity you ask the less features you have. > That why PDF/A has been created. > This is another question. We can discuss about embedding font in ODF but > please don't sell it for document fidelity reasons. But this *is* for fidelity reasons - just not meant for archiving. If I send my team (e.g. in India) a document created in Impress or Writer, I want the document to be opened in more or less exact the same form it was sent. This has nothing to do about being able to open the document 20 years from now or about legal requirements for archiving (in Denmark, TIFF and JPEG are only allowed formats). This has to do with sending documents around *now* and to enable any recipient to have all information readily available for displaying the document in the form I created it in. :o) -- Jesper Lund Stocholm www.idippedut.dk SC34/WG4 http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/wg4/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Hi Jesper, Il 27/06/2011 10:49, Jesper Lund Stocholm ha scritto: > Hi Davide, > > 2011/6/27 Davide Dozza : >> Il 26/06/2011 23:21, plino ha scritto: >> [...] >> >>> >>> Charles-H. Schulz wrote: If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's been designed, not ODF. >>> >>> PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity. It's not an editable format. >> >> OOo, LibO, Symphony, Word, Abiword, Koffice and so on are tools for >> editing documents and not for keeping viewing *and* printing fidelity. >> For such purpose you should use desktop publishing software which has a >> complete different approach (i.e. Inkscape). >> >> Also for PDF, embedding fonts is an option. Only for PDF-A it's mandatory. >> >>> Should I make my presentations using a PDF? >> >> Yes. By embedding your fonts if you want to be *reasonable* sure that >> you will open the file and obtain a similar result in the future. > > Aren't you guys really talking sortof detached from "the real world?" > (no disrespect intended). I've been working on OOo migrations since 2003. Especially for PA. I think I'm not detached from the real world ;-) > > Even though you might be right that you could pass around documents as > PDF/A, the reality is that users simply don't do that. Users create > their content in Writer, Impress, Calc etc and they pass those files > around and not their PDF-counter parts. This is really orthogonal to > the collaboration process - be that "for view" or for "for editing". > Also, suggesting to use PDF for Impress-files is not really going to > work. This will effectively stop any animations, transformation, > embedded multimedia etc from being of any use. I wish I opened Word 5.0 files in the same way as I did 20 years ago but One thing it's what people wish, another what the law requires and yet another is what technology offers. For a PA when a document has to be long-term archived only in a electronic way, the Italian law requires PDF/A. Fidelity is a must. You have to keep in mind that there is a trade off between features and fidelity. Because fidelity it's a question of rendering algorithms: more features means more complexity for such algorithms. Therefore the more fidelity you ask the less features you have. That why PDF/A has been created. > > So in the real world users (not all, of course) *will* be troubled > about this, they *will* look for alternatives and they *will* blame > LibO/ODF for this feature lack ... regardless that usage of PDF would > seem like a better choice for them. > > Personally I don't really understand why ODF TC (or, Charles in > particular) is to adamant in not wanting to add embedding of fonts to > ODF. It seems like a small addition to ODF-spec and would serve the > purpose of users that have no other alternative than use Microsoft > Office. On the other hand I agree completely that ODF TC should be > presented with "working code" presumably in a branch of e.g. LibO > where (the value of) the functionality is demonstrated. > This is another question. We can discuss about embedding font in ODF but please don't sell it for document fidelity reasons. Davide -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Hi Davide, 2011/6/27 Davide Dozza : > Il 26/06/2011 23:21, plino ha scritto: > [...] > >> >> Charles-H. Schulz wrote: >>> If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's >>> been designed, not ODF. >> >> PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity. It's not an editable format. > > OOo, LibO, Symphony, Word, Abiword, Koffice and so on are tools for > editing documents and not for keeping viewing *and* printing fidelity. > For such purpose you should use desktop publishing software which has a > complete different approach (i.e. Inkscape). > > Also for PDF, embedding fonts is an option. Only for PDF-A it's mandatory. > >> Should I make my presentations using a PDF? > > Yes. By embedding your fonts if you want to be *reasonable* sure that > you will open the file and obtain a similar result in the future. Aren't you guys really talking sortof detached from "the real world?" (no disrespect intended). Even though you might be right that you could pass around documents as PDF/A, the reality is that users simply don't do that. Users create their content in Writer, Impress, Calc etc and they pass those files around and not their PDF-counter parts. This is really orthogonal to the collaboration process - be that "for view" or for "for editing". Also, suggesting to use PDF for Impress-files is not really going to work. This will effectively stop any animations, transformation, embedded multimedia etc from being of any use. So in the real world users (not all, of course) *will* be troubled about this, they *will* look for alternatives and they *will* blame LibO/ODF for this feature lack ... regardless that usage of PDF would seem like a better choice for them. Personally I don't really understand why ODF TC (or, Charles in particular) is to adamant in not wanting to add embedding of fonts to ODF. It seems like a small addition to ODF-spec and would serve the purpose of users that have no other alternative than use Microsoft Office. On the other hand I agree completely that ODF TC should be presented with "working code" presumably in a branch of e.g. LibO where (the value of) the functionality is demonstrated. -- Jesper Lund Stocholm www.idippedut.dk SC34/WG4 http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/wg4/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Il 26/06/2011 23:21, plino ha scritto: [...] > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: >> If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's >> been designed, not ODF. > > PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity. It's not an editable format. OOo, LibO, Symphony, Word, Abiword, Koffice and so on are tools for editing documents and not for keeping viewing *and* printing fidelity. For such purpose you should use desktop publishing software which has a complete different approach (i.e. Inkscape). Also for PDF, embedding fonts is an option. Only for PDF-A it's mandatory. > Should I make my presentations using a PDF? Yes. By embedding your fonts if you want to be *reasonable* sure that you will open the file and obtain a similar result in the future. If you want to be *more sure* export it in PDF-A which is a subset of PDF. You must be persuaded that there is a trade off. You can't use a microwave oven to dry your cat. Davide -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Hello Pedro, Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 14:21:25 -0700 (PDT), plino a écrit : > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > > > But let me ask it > > again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice? > > Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us > > break the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it? > > > > Because any document that allows the use of different fonts and > relies on them to be displayed as expected needs to have the ability > to embed fonts. No, ODF already has the most important feature: > vendor independence. But if the dominant vendor includes a feature > and it is critical for some type of documents, not including it is a > handicap. And it can become a serious barrier for wide adoption. I don't necessarily agree on that -MS OOXML includes features you don't find inside ODF but few people even know they are there- but while this feature is important to you I strongly feel that it's something very, very few MS Office users know about... > > Regarding your demonstration Cases: Case A is a non-issue. If users > decide to ignore instructions and use it incorrectly is it the OASIS > or TDFs fault? Should microwave manufacturers not sell microwaves > because someone in the future might have the brilliant idea of drying > their cat in it? Oh, there are lawsuits like that every month. Remember there are record labels suing BitTorrent just because it can be used to download music? > > Case B: if in a given device fonts are not displayed properly (the > software should warn about that) But in the case of TextEdit, it doesn't, and good luck to have Apple fix that. > then ODF is still doing it's most > important job i.e. making sure the contents are displayed in a > readable way. That is right. > > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's > > been designed, not ODF. > > PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity. layout fidelity. Which means printing fidelity and visual fidelity, not only for printing. > It's not an editable > format. Should I make my presentations using a PDF? What you can do is export your presentations under PDF. Many people do that. > Following that reasoning I should use PPT for my presentations > "That's the reason it's been designed, not ODF" Here's the glitch: You would have to set that specific option for PPT. If you send it to me maybe I won't be able to read them. > > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > Do you have any idea what it takes to spread the use of a format? > > No, I don't. But can you accept that it probably takes longer to > accept a format that has limitations than if the format is superior > to the one it's replacing? Except that these "limitations" do not seem to be crucial for many people.But to come back to spreading the use of a format: its features are not what will make the format's use spread (in the office documents context), it's the choice of applications + the adoption policy + raising the awareness + ecosystem development + change management inside organizations using it . > How long will it take mkv to replace avi? Not much I guess ;) Bad example, I think. .avi is not dependent on a dominant player imposing the use of its own formats. How long will it take to .ogg to replace .mp3 or .m4a? Best, Charles. > > Regards, > Pedro > > -- > View this message in context: > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RE-tdf-discuss-Re-Font-Embedding-in-ODF-was-RE-ANN-ODF-1-2-Candidate-OASIS-Standard-Enters-60-Day-Pu-tp3110117p3111827.html > Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Hi Pedro and Charles et al Le 2011-06-26 17:21, plino a écrit : Charles-H. Schulz wrote: But let me ask it again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice? Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us break the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it? Because any document that allows the use of different fonts and relies on them to be displayed as expected needs to have the ability to embed fonts. No, ODF already has the most important feature: vendor independence. But if the dominant vendor includes a feature and it is critical for some type of documents, not including it is a handicap. And it can become a serious barrier for wide adoption. Regarding your demonstration Cases: Case A is a non-issue. If users decide to ignore instructions and use it incorrectly is it the OASIS or TDFs fault? Should microwave manufacturers not sell microwaves because someone in the future might have the brilliant idea of drying their cat in it? If the ODF were to embed fonts, then there would also be documentation re: use/abuse of embedded fonts which would be publicly available. LibreOffice should already be advocating fonts that do not have any licensing restrictions -- maybe we should consider adding a blurb on this on our website as an advocacy item regarding font usage. Having said all this, I also agree, if the user just ignores these recommendations and warnings, then I am sure that the OASIS group would not be held liable. Case B: if in a given device fonts are not displayed properly (the software should warn about that) then ODF is still doing it's most important job i.e. making sure the contents are displayed in a readable way. If the text editor cannot render the file correctly then the LibreOffice reader should be used. This is exactly a good example where a LibreOffice reader would be used. Cheers Marc -- Marc Paré http://www.parEntreprise.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
In order to succeed, a mass movement must develop at the earliest moment a compact corporate organization and a capacity to integrate all comers. —Eric Hoffer, American philosopher This discussion is interesting but it reminds me of people re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Or, perhaps a better analogy is where there are two battleships, one is 30x bigger and the other is undermanned. In fact, there is only a skeleton crew so if there is a problem in many areas of the ship, there is no one able to fix it. Meanwhile, some of the crew are sitting on deck chairs discussing how they'd like a better battleship, but they are at sea so it is not possible now. I believe the best way to ensure TDF's success is for you to find a crew to fix all of these as fast as possible: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Easy_Hacks Forks often take years to get going because they take years to get a large enough of a team. That is a random list, but the sooner you can fix those, the sooner you can fix other things including font features. Fixing bugs is the way to be able to write features. People can work anywhere they want, but that is the front door, and evidence you need more. People with expertise already are valuable. It is good is that you have people who are able to mentor others. Some forks didn't even have that. You need to find enough people so you have expertise over every line, which I don't think you have today. I also hope there is a crew hacking ribbon-like UIs in Python, one working on server and web features, etc. If you want to succeed in a decade, and you are mostly going to be volunteers, you need many, focused on things that improve the product today. You can keep a positive attitude by remembering there is another battleship that is 10x undermanned than you ;-) It says OpenOffice, etc. on the side, but that is not the most important consideration. Kind regards, -Keith http://keithcu.com/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Steve Edmonds wrote: > > The better solution is to include the fonts required in the odt file > just for LO use (like MS, and 2 previously mentioned word processors). > That is another solution, but not necessarily a better solution. I think a better solution is to ship the TTF once rather than embedding it into every file. PDFs only include the characters that are in use, where the ODF would need to include the whole thing. You also can have problems with versioning (what if the version on the computer is newer than the one in the ODT?) I recommend people ship fonts out of band like are done with hyphenation tables. Regards, -Keith -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Hi. On 2011-06-27 14:17, Robert Derman wrote: > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: >> Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 09:41:07 -0700 (PDT), >> plino a écrit : >> >> >>> Charles-H. Schulz wrote: >>> Now, as for humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way that ODF will lose if it does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either. >>> I didn't say that. I said that IF OASIS insists on refusing to embed >>> fonts in ODF (which is what you also peremptorily affirmed, even >>> though Dennis Hammilton in the ODF TC says it's not so) it is not the >>> right file format for LibreOffice. >>> >> >> >> Why? Note: I'm not saying it's a bad idea to embed fonts, I'm saying >> (me, who's also part of that ODF TC) it's very unlikely. I think there >> will be problems of many kinds, some of them being of legal nature >> (esp. related to the use and distribution of fonts). But let me ask it >> again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice? >> Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us break >> the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it? >> >> >>> ODF doesn't loose any value as an open universal file format if it >>> decides not to embed fonts. It just isn't right for an office suite. >>> >>> In any case, it's my opinion. It doesn't lack humility. >>> >> >> >> Okay... So let's get very practical here. You mentioned the case of >> Impress presentations, and I think it's fair to say that what you have >> described is something many of us has faced in the past, with .odp >> files or .ppt files. Now here are two cases that would advocate for not >> embedding fonts. What I'm trying to show here is that font embedding is >> not the magical feature that's going to solve all of our problems, not >> that embedding fonts is a bad idea in every case. >> Case A: User Joe wants to use some super-duper fonts (called, font A) >> for his presentation and embeds fonts within his sales pitch >> presentation in .odp . Fonts A has been designed by designer Bob, who >> specifically licensed them for non commercial usage. User Joe is >> sending his presentation to customer Ike, his boss, Peter, and his >> colleague, Ed. His presentation embeds fonts that are not eligible for >> commercial use (per Designer Bob's terms). By using these fonts in his >> presentation, User Joe has infringed the license 3 times. But it gets >> worse. Customer Ike sends the presentation to his boss, Mary. 4 times. >> Mary sends it to her head of accounting for validation. 5 times... And >> so on. Do you get the point? >> > This reminds me of something I once heard, I think it was on the OOo > Discuss list, anyway a number of users were proposing a font > "Blacklist" that would list those fonts with too restrictive > licensing. End users would be advised not to purchase, download or > use any of the fonts on the list. It would be kind of a > persona-non-grata of fonts. The upshot of it was that it was a way of > saying to font designers/publishers -- "If that's the way you want to > be with your licensing, then you can keep your darned font!" > This is a problem that practically affects our company. The practicalities do not change the outcome or licensing considerations, only the difficulty of using LO and ODF. We have a number of custom fonts representing control panel displays, we use these to write operator manuals, we send the manuals to various people for editing and we send the manuals out for translation (other language versions). We also use Arial as the standard font. We find the arial font varies from machine to machine, and the writing reflows and layout is upset. We need our custom fonts. Our present solution is to email the odt and attach the fonts to the email, so the fonts just tag along with the document for the user to install, not convenient and everyone gets the fonts. The better solution is to include the fonts required in the odt file just for LO use (like MS, and 2 previously mentioned word processors). This also enables more control on use of the licensed fonts, if even just a big warning "Have you checked your terms of use" and they can't be saved as system fonts for general use. steve -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 09:41:07 -0700 (PDT), plino a écrit : Charles-H. Schulz wrote: Now, as for humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way that ODF will lose if it does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either. I didn't say that. I said that IF OASIS insists on refusing to embed fonts in ODF (which is what you also peremptorily affirmed, even though Dennis Hammilton in the ODF TC says it's not so) it is not the right file format for LibreOffice. Why? Note: I'm not saying it's a bad idea to embed fonts, I'm saying (me, who's also part of that ODF TC) it's very unlikely. I think there will be problems of many kinds, some of them being of legal nature (esp. related to the use and distribution of fonts). But let me ask it again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice? Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us break the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it? ODF doesn't loose any value as an open universal file format if it decides not to embed fonts. It just isn't right for an office suite. In any case, it's my opinion. It doesn't lack humility. Okay... So let's get very practical here. You mentioned the case of Impress presentations, and I think it's fair to say that what you have described is something many of us has faced in the past, with .odp files or .ppt files. Now here are two cases that would advocate for not embedding fonts. What I'm trying to show here is that font embedding is not the magical feature that's going to solve all of our problems, not that embedding fonts is a bad idea in every case. Case A: User Joe wants to use some super-duper fonts (called, font A) for his presentation and embeds fonts within his sales pitch presentation in .odp . Fonts A has been designed by designer Bob, who specifically licensed them for non commercial usage. User Joe is sending his presentation to customer Ike, his boss, Peter, and his colleague, Ed. His presentation embeds fonts that are not eligible for commercial use (per Designer Bob's terms). By using these fonts in his presentation, User Joe has infringed the license 3 times. But it gets worse. Customer Ike sends the presentation to his boss, Mary. 4 times. Mary sends it to her head of accounting for validation. 5 times... And so on. Do you get the point? This reminds me of something I once heard, I think it was on the OOo Discuss list, anyway a number of users were proposing a font "Blacklist" that would list those fonts with too restrictive licensing. End users would be advised not to purchase, download or use any of the fonts on the list. It would be kind of a persona-non-grata of fonts. The upshot of it was that it was a way of saying to font designers/publishers -- "If that's the way you want to be with your licensing, then you can keep your darned font!" -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 09:41:07 -0700 (PDT), plino a écrit : > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > > > Now, as for humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way > > that ODF will lose if it > > does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either. > > I didn't say that. I said that IF OASIS insists on refusing to embed > fonts in ODF (which is what you also peremptorily affirmed, even > though Dennis Hammilton in the ODF TC says it's not so) it is not the > right file format for LibreOffice. Why? Note: I'm not saying it's a bad idea to embed fonts, I'm saying (me, who's also part of that ODF TC) it's very unlikely. I think there will be problems of many kinds, some of them being of legal nature (esp. related to the use and distribution of fonts). But let me ask it again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice? Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us break the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it? > > ODF doesn't loose any value as an open universal file format if it > decides not to embed fonts. It just isn't right for an office suite. > > In any case, it's my opinion. It doesn't lack humility. Okay... So let's get very practical here. You mentioned the case of Impress presentations, and I think it's fair to say that what you have described is something many of us has faced in the past, with .odp files or .ppt files. Now here are two cases that would advocate for not embedding fonts. What I'm trying to show here is that font embedding is not the magical feature that's going to solve all of our problems, not that embedding fonts is a bad idea in every case. Case A: User Joe wants to use some super-duper fonts (called, font A) for his presentation and embeds fonts within his sales pitch presentation in .odp . Fonts A has been designed by designer Bob, who specifically licensed them for non commercial usage. User Joe is sending his presentation to customer Ike, his boss, Peter, and his colleague, Ed. His presentation embeds fonts that are not eligible for commercial use (per Designer Bob's terms). By using these fonts in his presentation, User Joe has infringed the license 3 times. But it gets worse. Customer Ike sends the presentation to his boss, Mary. 4 times. Mary sends it to her head of accounting for validation. 5 times... And so on. Do you get the point? Case B: ODF is designed to be stable and -possibly- readable on a variety of devices, even primary ones. Basically, you should be able to extract and read information in a simpler mode from ODF documents. Let me give you a practical example. I have a Mac, and Macs are actually ODF capable. True, iWork (Apple office suite) does not provide ODF support but Mac OS X does. If you open the nifty little text editor inside Mac OS X called TextEdit, you can actually open and read ODF documents (text, mostly). It does the job well, but it's a text editor. So let's say a friend of mine is organizing a Medieval style costumed party. He sends invitations to me, and guess what, he also uses LibreOffice or Calligra, so all he has to do is picking one of the gothic/medieval fonts on his system and write his invitation letter, then sends it to me and others. In your view, let's say ODF can embed fonts here, and so these fonts are embedded automatically. But let's say I don't have LibreOffice on my mac. Let's say for a moment I don't know LibreOffice. All I get in my Mail client is the file, and when I open it on my Mac Text Edit pops up. What would happen? Well, let's say ODF could embed fonts. Text Edit still would not be able to display them. Why? It only uses a set of specific fonts; it's a text editor, a "Word Pad" if you will, not an office suite. So even if you embed it, you still lose their layout anyway. My point is to show that embedding fonts is not going to be the end of all problems. It will be a feature, and it might get problematic. I think that for the sake of interoperability and usage, not embedding fonts for an office file format is easier and avoids specific issues. If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's been designed, not ODF. > > Again, that is not what I said. I was suggesting that if LO or OASIS > want to consider embedding fonts there is an Open Source model you > can use instead of starting from zero. > Do you have any idea what it takes to spread the use of a format? Best, Charles. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > Now, as for humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way that ODF > will lose if it > does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either. I didn't say that. I said that IF OASIS insists on refusing to embed fonts in ODF (which is what you also peremptorily affirmed, even though Dennis Hammilton in the ODF TC says it's not so) it is not the right file format for LibreOffice. ODF doesn't loose any value as an open universal file format if it decides not to embed fonts. It just isn't right for an office suite. In any case, it's my opinion. It doesn't lack humility. Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > If you wish to use .sla format instead of ODF, go ahead. Something tells > me > that fonts embedding won't matter as it would require recipients to have > Scribus, which, although a great piece of software is less used and known > than LibO or OOo. Again, that is not what I said. I was suggesting that if LO or OASIS want to consider embedding fonts there is an Open Source model you can use instead of starting from zero. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RE-tdf-discuss-Re-Font-Embedding-in-ODF-was-RE-ANN-ODF-1-2-Candidate-OASIS-Standard-Enters-60-Day-Pu-tp3110117p3110913.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Okay, since you're in fingepointing mode, it is indeed my mistake to think that fonts could not be embedded in MSO formats. I do maintain that very few people know about this, and that by rule they're not included. Now, as for humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way that ODF will lose if it does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either. If you wish to use .sla format instead of ODF, go ahead. Something tells me that fonts embedding won't matter as it would require recipients to have Scribus, which, although a great piece of software is less used and known than LibO or OOo. Best, Charles. Le 26 juin 2011, 1:15 PM, "plino" a écrit : Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > We do all have lots of responsibility, all of us. I can assure... Given your position in this community you should be humble enough to recognize your mistake. But that is OT. Being a Power User doesn't give me the Technical skills to be part of a TC. In any case if OASIS and/or TDF have the will to add font embedding in ODF there is no need to reinvent the wheel. Scribus (http://www.scribus.net) an Open Source Desktop Publishing program licensed under GPL already has this feature included in it's file format .sla Regards, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Font-Embedding-in-ODF-was-RE-ANN-ODF-1-2-Candidate-OASIS-Standard-Enters-60-Day-Public-Review-tp3106577p3110076.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.orgPosting guidelines + mor... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 00:30:07 -0700 (PDT), plino a écrit : > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > > > So are you saying your word documents embed fonts on a daily basis? > > I've never seen any similar documents. You get the impression of > > that -maybe- because on a windows to windows environment everybody > > uses fonts that are already available on the system. Of course, ODF > > (and others) do keep the reference of the font name and if I have > > the same font on my system it will try to reuse the same font. But > > just for reference: except for specific cases: office document > > formats including MSOffice DON'T include fonts. PDF does (there are > > less used formats) and that's what it's know for. > > > > YES. I embed the fonts in ALL Powerpoint documents. I could do the > same in Word documents if I wished. > > In MS Office you just have to tick one option box "Embed TrueType > fonts" > > http://support.microsoft.com/kb/290952 > > It's not a reference. It's the font embedded. And it doesn't depend > "on specific cases". It's a USER decision. > > I think is really absurd that a TDF SC member makes such > affirmations. You have the responsibility to verify the facts before > stating the same statement vehemently twice. We do all have lots of responsibility, all of us. I can assure you that people usually, most of the time DON'T include fonts in their MSO documents. But then, who am I to argue? You seem to be a MSO power user. Go and contribute to the ODF TC at the OASIS. I mean, really do contribute; everyone's welcome to join. Best, Charles. > > -- > View this message in context: > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Font-Embedding-in-ODF-was-RE-ANN-ODF-1-2-Candidate-OASIS-Standard-Enters-60-Day-Public-Review-tp3106577p3109805.html > Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Le 2011-06-25 11:36, aqualung a écrit : Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: 3. There are other ways to make fonts available in the meantime, although not so straightforward as embedded fonts, they also don't make the document bigger. A similar discussion took place in March and I http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RE-tdf-discuss-Re-Feature-request-embed-font-td2706681.html#a2715893 suggested then a combination of education/documentation and cooperation with websites offering fonts with generous licenses. Nobody took up my offer then to start on a first draft of expanding the Help (web-based and locally installed) in that direction. Maybe I should offer again in the "Documentation" section of Nabble? Why don't you just start a wiki page with it and if it may be easier for everyone to see your points this way. Otherwise, you will take up the same conversation at another future date and it will never amount to anything. Cheers Marc -- Marc Paré http://www.parEntreprise.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
RE: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
+1 although it is about fidelity too, especially in things like presentations. -Original Message- From: Andrew Douglas Pitonyak [mailto:and...@pitonyak.org] Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 10:27 To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review) [ ... ] Off hand, I would say that embedding a font is not just for readers to use. I would say that there must then be support for LO to fully use that in the editor for viewing, editing, printing, and generating other file formats that support it (such as PDF with embedded fonts). -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
On 06/25/2011 01:14 PM, Marc Paré wrote: Hi Dennis Le 2011-06-25 12:40, Dennis E. Hamilton a écrit : PS: Since August 2008, when I became a member of the ODF TC, I don't recall any conclusion that font embedding is out of scope for the OpenDocument Format. I don't know what such an assertion might be based on. It is definitely the case that the ODF specification does not specify the rendering and presentation of documents. But that doesn't exclude font embedding. After all, there are already significant provisions for fonts in ODF, they just don't encompass embedding font files. Thanks for the information. This all sounds promising to me. So essentially, what you are saying is if ... "hypothetically" ... a proposal were to be put forward for embedding fonts and a group such as LibreOffice showed a committed willingness to use this new option with ... let's say ... a LibreOffice Reader and if other groups were to support this new option, then it may pass? Off hand, I would say that embedding a font is not just for readers to use. I would say that there must then be support for LO to fully use that in the editor for viewing, editing, printing, and generating other file formats that support it (such as PDF with embedded fonts). -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Hi Dennis Le 2011-06-25 12:40, Dennis E. Hamilton a écrit : The reason for the periodic Committee Drafts is to have reasonably-stable feature specifications that implementers can start on and confirm the specification of before we do the work to produce the final stable specification (a Committee Specification) that then goes forward as a Candidate OASIS Standard and then OASIS Standard. I think this conversation needs to be made more concrete. The inclusion of font embedding into the ODF 1.x specification is not the issue. The issue is, who has it be such an imperative that they are willing to have and document an implementation-specific solution well enough that others can interoperate with it. Then, or concurrently, it can be rolled into the ODF specification work as the basis for an independently-implementable, interoperable feature of ODF. The ODF TC does not implement anything. And it is a waste of the volunteer efforts of the ODF TC participants to specify features that no one implements or that are not practically implementable or for which there are already good-enough solutions that can be adapted. There's a hand-and-glove partnership required for a feature as substantial as font embedding. So far, I have not heard any offers. - Dennis PS: Since August 2008, when I became a member of the ODF TC, I don't recall any conclusion that font embedding is out of scope for the OpenDocument Format. I don't know what such an assertion might be based on. It is definitely the case that the ODF specification does not specify the rendering and presentation of documents. But that doesn't exclude font embedding. After all, there are already significant provisions for fonts in ODF, they just don't encompass embedding font files. Thanks for the information. This all sounds promising to me. So essentially, what you are saying is if ... "hypothetically" ... a proposal were to be put forward for embedding fonts and a group such as LibreOffice showed a committed willingness to use this new option with ... let's say ... a LibreOffice Reader and if other groups were to support this new option, then it may pass? -Original Message- From: plino [mailto:pedl...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 01:26 To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review) Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: 4. It is incorrect to presume that Font Embedding will not be in ODF 1.3 or any other. While font embedding did not make the feature cut in the prioritization for ODF 1.2, that does not mean it can't be resurrected. It is early days for ODF 1.3, which is scheduled to take a two-year development process. What is *missing* is a serious proposal that deals with the complexities, borrows from some already-worked-out approach in other software, and is brought forth at the ODF TC in an unencumbered form. Someone has to do the heavy lifting. You can also respond to the public review, although something concrete that can be used in a constructive manner would be particularly welcome. The ODF TC *has* to address every Public Review comment, although that doesn't mean we will do anything about it. Good catches will probably be saved up for an Errata or lead to action in ODF 1.3. Le 2011-06-24 13:13, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit : So, let me state and restate this : ODF will not embed fonts in the 1.2, 1.3, nor in the future, because the format is not meant to focus on faithful layout rendering. Instead, PDF is meant that. ODF focuses on office document exchanges. Best, Charles. Even if font embedding is included in ODF 1.3 (which is unlikely according to Charles' statement) that will only happen in 2 years time. I think TDF and LO are betting on the wrong horse. It's not only going to start the race much later but also there seems to be no guarantee that it will run faster or better (if Charles' statement is correct they aren't even on the same race because their goals are different) In any case, if LibreOffice's goal is to be a suite that stands behind the ODF format then it should review what it promises. If it can't embed fonts, it can never be a replacement for MS Office. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Font-Embedding-in-ODF-was-RE-ANN-ODF-1-2-Candidate-OASIS-Standard-Enters-60-Day-Public-Review-tp3106577p3107356.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. Actually, 2 years is not that long and the world of office suites is a slow one. We will still be using desktop office suites in two year's time. Just imagine, many of our LibreOffice members are still on limited internet connection along with dial-up connection. Cheers Marc -- Marc Paré http://www.parEntreprise.com -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundati
RE: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
The reason for the periodic Committee Drafts is to have reasonably-stable feature specifications that implementers can start on and confirm the specification of before we do the work to produce the final stable specification (a Committee Specification) that then goes forward as a Candidate OASIS Standard and then OASIS Standard. I think this conversation needs to be made more concrete. The inclusion of font embedding into the ODF 1.x specification is not the issue. The issue is, who has it be such an imperative that they are willing to have and document an implementation-specific solution well enough that others can interoperate with it. Then, or concurrently, it can be rolled into the ODF specification work as the basis for an independently-implementable, interoperable feature of ODF. The ODF TC does not implement anything. And it is a waste of the volunteer efforts of the ODF TC participants to specify features that no one implements or that are not practically implementable or for which there are already good-enough solutions that can be adapted. There's a hand-and-glove partnership required for a feature as substantial as font embedding. So far, I have not heard any offers. - Dennis PS: Since August 2008, when I became a member of the ODF TC, I don't recall any conclusion that font embedding is out of scope for the OpenDocument Format. I don't know what such an assertion might be based on. It is definitely the case that the ODF specification does not specify the rendering and presentation of documents. But that doesn't exclude font embedding. After all, there are already significant provisions for fonts in ODF, they just don't encompass embedding font files. -Original Message- From: plino [mailto:pedl...@gmail.com] Sent: Saturday, June 25, 2011 01:26 To: discuss@documentfoundation.org Subject: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review) Dennis E. Hamilton wrote: > > 4. It is incorrect to presume that Font Embedding will not be in ODF 1.3 > or any other. While font embedding did not make the feature cut in the > prioritization for ODF 1.2, that does not mean it can't be resurrected. > It is early days for ODF 1.3, which is scheduled to take a two-year > development process. > What is *missing* is a serious proposal that deals with the > complexities, borrows from some already-worked-out approach in other > software, and is brought forth at the ODF TC in an unencumbered form. > Someone has to do the heavy lifting. > You can also respond to the public review, although something concrete > that can be used in a constructive manner would be particularly welcome. > The ODF TC *has* to address every Public Review comment, although that > doesn't mean we will do anything about it. Good catches will probably be > saved up for an Errata or lead to action in ODF 1.3. > > Le 2011-06-24 13:13, Charles-H. Schulz a écrit : > >> So, let me state and restate this : ODF will not embed fonts in the >> 1.2, 1.3, nor in the future, because the format is not meant to focus on >> faithful layout rendering. Instead, PDF is meant that. ODF focuses on >> office document exchanges. >> >> Best, >> >> Charles. > Even if font embedding is included in ODF 1.3 (which is unlikely according to Charles' statement) that will only happen in 2 years time. I think TDF and LO are betting on the wrong horse. It's not only going to start the race much later but also there seems to be no guarantee that it will run faster or better (if Charles' statement is correct they aren't even on the same race because their goals are different) In any case, if LibreOffice's goal is to be a suite that stands behind the ODF format then it should review what it promises. If it can't embed fonts, it can never be a replacement for MS Office. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Font-Embedding-in-ODF-was-RE-ANN-ODF-1-2-Candidate-OASIS-Standard-Enters-60-Day-Public-Review-tp3106577p3107356.html Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Le Sat, 25 Jun 2011 08:01:26 -0700 (PDT), plino a écrit : > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > > > No it doesn't. > > > > Of course it does. Maybe you don't use it or don't know how to do > it. But don't say it doesn't. So are you saying your word documents embed fonts on a daily basis? I've never seen any similar documents. You get the impression of that -maybe- because on a windows to windows environment everybody uses fonts that are already available on the system. Of course, ODF (and others) do keep the reference of the font name and if I have the same font on my system it will try to reuse the same font. But just for reference: except for specific cases: office document formats including MSOffice DON'T include fonts. PDF does (there are less used formats) and that's what it's know for. > > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > > > But I think we're also missing the point if -let's say > > we were to design a brand new office file format that embeds or does > > not embed fonts- why should anyone be using it? Choosing a format > > that's not the dominant format is already a reasoned choice, > > oftentimes an act of departure from the dominant player, and > > sometimes a political act. > > I think you are missing the point: it's not simply a matter of the > embedded fonts. If the brand new file format that you are creating > wants to attract users it can never have less features than the one > it wants to replace. Or at least it can not miss critical features. Network effect. Do you have any idea how many superior formats have been created but that never got adopted? > > Even if people want to switch for "political" reasons, I'm sure they > don't want their work crippled... They don't, that's true. But don't mix the various purposes of formats. Best, Charles. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
Le Sat, 25 Jun 2011 12:34:29 +0200, Manfred Usselmann a écrit : > On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 01:25:47 -0700 (PDT) > plino wrote: > > > In any case, if LibreOffice's goal is to be a suite that stands > > behind the ODF format then it should review what it promises. If it > > can't embed fonts, it can never be a replacement for MS Office. > > Does MS Office embed fonts? > > Manfred > No it doesn't. But I think we're also missing the point if -let's say we were to design a brand new office file format that embeds or does not embed fonts- why should anyone be using it? Choosing a format that's not the dominant format is already a reasoned choice, oftentimes an act of departure from the dominant player, and sometimes a political act. Embedding fonts will not magically solve the MSFT formats dominance in the field of office suite. The challenger here is ODF, which has a rather wide support that extends much beyond LibreOffice. We certainly can improve ODF and are encouraged to do so; but I would like to point out that document formats follow (strange?)specific rules and patterns that usually do not rely on any specific feature that would decide its dominance. The most famous pattern here is the network effect, essentially meaning that the more a format gets used, well... the more it gets used :) In order to change its dominance you need to be breaking its "network" of users and you can't do it because you have something better (okay, you should have something better, but it usually does not rely on the format if it's meant to serve the same purposes) but because users or the ones mandating such uses have taken the decision to stop using the dominant format. Hence the value of standardization that helps enable a level playing field for the competition but also acts as a value proposition that has in itself the merit of breaking the habit of using the format of the dominant player. Best, Charles. -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
У суб, 25. 06 2011. у 12:34 +0200, Manfred Usselmann пише: > > Does MS Office embed fonts? It is a rarely used option, disabled by default. To use it not breaking copyright law, you need to have a properly licensed font. If you are using non-free font, usually you are not allowed to redistribute it in your document. PDF does not embed complete font, just the forms used in the document. With editable documents, you need to have complete font. Kind regards, Goran Rakic -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)
On Sat, 25 Jun 2011 01:25:47 -0700 (PDT) plino wrote: > In any case, if LibreOffice's goal is to be a suite that stands > behind the ODF format then it should review what it promises. If it > can't embed fonts, it can never be a replacement for MS Office. Does MS Office embed fonts? Manfred -- Manfred Usselmann -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
