Re: [Fonts]enquiry about pcf/bdf font support
On Friday 16 August 2002 3:49 am, James H. Cloos Jr. wrote: [...] | | (Note that not all have negative args to endchar) and that the CFF | versions do not have cvt or loca tables. It is probably the lack of | one of those two tables that keeps ftview from displaying the bitmaps | in the otf versions. | | Expect a URL for the four variations of at least most of the bdf fonts | in xfree86's cvs w/in the next twelve hours. Hello James! Do you have URL with fonts *ready*? | | -JimC | | ___ | Fonts mailing list | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts -- Vadim Plessky http://kde2.newmail.ru (English) 33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE http://kde2.newmail.ru/kde_themes.html KDE mini-Themes http://kde2.newmail.ru/themes/ ___ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
[Fonts]Re: [Freetype] Buggy metrics with FreeType 2 and BDF or PCF fonts?
I'm attaching a little test program that you should run on 8x13.bdf and 8x13.pcf. Please notice the (x, y) couple printed for every glyph, which are, respectively, face-glyph-metrics.horiBearingX and face-glyph-metrics.horiBearingY. The 8x13 font has a bounding box of (0, -2) through (8, 11). Thus, I believe that the correct values should be (0, 704). However, I'm getting (0, -128) for the BDF version; and (512, 704) for PCF version. Can anyone confirm this bug, or tell me what I'm doing wrong? I can confirm that. PCF: It is a typo in pcfdriver.c which uses `rightSideBearing' instead of `leftSideBearing'. BDF: The bitmap's height was missing in horiBearingY. I've fixed that in the CVS. Thanks for the report. Werner ___ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
Re: [Fonts]FreeType bug report
On Tuesday 20 August 2002 1:21 am, Pablo Saratxaga wrote: | Kaixo! | | On Mon, Aug 19, 2002 at 07:35:33PM +0200, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote: | I'm currently exploring the possibility of moving XFree86 from the PCF | format to the sfnt format for bitmap fonts. I've encountered a number | | 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. But indeed Qt3/KDE3 and GNOME2/GTK2 should be patched/tested against such fonts. BTW: I can tell that KDE3 can't print using OpenType fonts (exported from PfaEdit), which is *not good*. -- Vadim Plessky http://kde2.newmail.ru (English) 33 Window Decorations and 6 Widget Styles for KDE http://kde2.newmail.ru/kde_themes.html KDE mini-Themes http://kde2.newmail.ru/themes/ ___ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
Re: [Fonts]FreeType bug report
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 ? But indeed Qt3/KDE3 and GNOME2/GTK2 should be patched/tested against such fonts. There are a lot of utilities out there that use directly TTFs; from little utilities creating images for web counters, to programs doing 3D rendering of text,... and don't forget also other non-X11 environments; very bad press will happen if fonts are disseminated that cause problems (and they probably will be disseminated if people think they are just normal TTF fonts). So, using a different extension name will solve a lot of trouble. -- Ki ça vos våye bén, Pablo Saratxaga http://chanae.stben.be/pablo/ PGP Key available, key ID: 0xD9B85466 [you can write me in Walloon, Spanish, French, English, Italian or Portuguese] msg01080/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [Fonts]enquiry about pcf/bdf font support
Vadim == Vadim Plessky [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Vadim Do you have URL with fonts *ready*? It looks like my post with the url failed to make it to the list The 100dpi and 75dpi dirs of fonts are at: http://jhcloos.com/fonts/bdfttf/tests/ The tar files have the bdfs and each of the four variations of ttf/otf pfaedit will produce from them. The pfaedit scripts included in those tars will only work as written with a very recent version of pfaedit; I beleive the relevant bug fix was committed on Aug 15. If you have an older version, you'll need to make the pathnames in the Import commands absolute. -JimC ___ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
Re: [Fonts]FreeType bug report
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
[Fonts]Legacy software and bitmap-only snfts [was: FreeType bug report]
PS You should also decide on an extenson name other than .ttf, I'm thinking of using .otf. The OpenType spec explicitly allows bitmap-only OTF fonts. It should also be legal to generate .ttf fonts, under the condition that I generate at least one entry in each of hmtx, glyf, and loca (which I'm doing by default right now). PS to avoid that those bitmap only ttf files get confused wwith real PS scalable fonts by people out there, otherwise there would be a lot PS of bad consequences. By default, I'm generating fonts which are perfectly valid TTF fonts. To a non-sbit aware rasteriser, they will appear as fonts with only one blank scalalble glyph. The good thing is that no existing software should crash on them. The bad thing is that existing software will happily use them, which may lead to user confusion. The alternative is to generate no loca or glyf tables at all, and using the ``OTTO'' signature in the font's header. Existing software should refuse to load such fonts, which will minimise user confusion. I'm waiting for the FreeType crowd to decide whether they wish to support such fonts. Juliusz ___ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
Re: [Fonts]FreeType bug report
PS what will happen if one of such programs tries to use a bitmap PS only font for displaying at a size for xhich there are no bitmaps PS embedded ? It will get sixty-odd thousand blank glyphs. Juliusz ___ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
Re: [Fonts]FreeType bug report
OT I'm pretty sure Microsoft ships a number of .ttf files with only OT bitmaps and no outlines with Windows... Interesting. Which ones? Juliusz ___ Fonts mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
