Victor Mote wrote (on Monday):
The following methods have now been added to org.axsl.font.Font:
public byte nextBolderWeight() ;
public byte nextLighterWeight() ;
public Font nextBolderFont() ;
public Font nextLighterFont() ;
public int unavailableChar(String string,
Victor Mote wrote (August 27, 2005):
In order to move forward, I suggest the addition of the following
methods in
org.axsl.font.Font:
public byte nextBolderWeight();
public byte nextLighterWeight();
public org.axsl.font.Font nextBolderFont();
public
Vincent Hennebert wrote:
Victor Mote a écrit :
I am ignoring font-stretch for now. I am unclear whether it works
similarly to font-weight, or whether it is totally
resolvable in the FO Tree.
Interestingly, CSS 2.1 (the only version of CSS 2 still
available at
W3C) removes
Victor Mote a écrit :
As I understand the spec, this works differently from
font-weight and can be resolved in the FO Tree: just select
the next expanded value for wider or next condensed for
narrower. The font selection would be performed only after,
when it is time to decide e.g. which font
On 25.08.2005 18:10:51 Victor Mote wrote:
Victor Mote wrote (August 8):
Manuel Mall wrote:
Regarding the bolder, lighter issue and the general
font selection
I looked at the pre-patch for FOrayFont adaptation to Fop
(http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35948)
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
I believe that font-stretch has to included just like
font-weight to select the actual font.
Sorry to be unclear. I understand that font-stretch must be included. The
issue is whether the wider and narrower constraints can be processed in
the FOTree by simply bumping
Victor Mote a écrit :
I am ignoring font-stretch for now. I am unclear whether it works similarly
to font-weight, or whether it is totally resolvable in the FO Tree.
Interestingly, CSS 2.1 (the only version of CSS 2 still available at W3C)
removes font-stretch entirely!!??!!
As I understand
Victor Mote wrote (August 8):
Manuel Mall wrote:
Regarding the bolder, lighter issue and the general
font selection
I looked at the pre-patch for FOrayFont adaptation to Fop
(http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35948) and
concluded that meddling with the font
Victor Mote a écrit :
Manuel Mall wrote:
Regarding the bolder, lighter issue and the general font
selection I looked at the pre-patch for FOrayFont adaptation
to Fop
(http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=35948) and
concluded that meddling with the font selection system will
Sounds like a few changes are necessary. Frankly, larger, smaller,
bolder and lighter are really not that important right now. I can't
remember anyone ever asking for them (although I could have simply not paid
attention). Yes, I think this could interfere with the FOray font
integration work but
I was looking at how to implement support for relative font weights
(bolder and lighter). The spec says that a relative font weight
refers to the next lighter or bolder font. This means we cannot simply
subtract/add 100 to the weight but we have to find the next font
relative to the current
11 matches
Mail list logo
