fonts-bugs June 2017

fonts-bugs@lists.fedoraproject.org

2 participants
88 discussions

[Bug 827516] New: [kn_IN] Vowel Signs U and UU do not correctly attach to many consonants in Lohit Kannada
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=827516 Bug ID: 827516 QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: 16 Priority: unspecified CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Summary: [kn_IN] Vowel Signs U and UU do not correctly attach to many consonants in Lohit Kannada Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: lohit-kannada-fonts Product: Fedora Created attachment 588536 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=588536&action=edit ODT and PDF for test-case Description of problem: While most other CONSONANT + VOWEL SIGN combinations in Lohit Kannada are mapped to precomposed glyphs, there are no pre-composed glyphs for vowel signs U and UU except for the consonants PA, PHA and VA (where the stroke for U/UU needs to come from below the consonant rather than the normal right side of the consonant). While in most cases, by virtue of appropriate RSB and LSB values of the consonant glyph and vowel sign glyph, the simple sequence of the two glyphs creates an appropriate appearance, this leaves out several instances where the glyphs do not overlap at all and hence appear disjointed. For a professional appearance of the font, this should be fixed. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 2.5.1 How reproducible: Input all possible sequences of Kannada consonants with vowel signs U and UU. (See attached ODT for text. Use BabelMap [http://www.babelstone.co.uk/software/babelmap.html] if you want the codepoints.) Actual results: You can see (as in the attached PDF) that some consonants do not properly get attached to the vowel signs U and UU. Expected results: All consonants should properly get attached to the vowel signs U and UU. Additional info: Consonants which are not properly joined with vowel sign U: KA* NYA DDA DA BA RA SSA** RRA LLLA*** * = see at high magnification ** = may need separate precomposed glyph with some adjustment to shape of left side of vowel sign *** = so-called FA of Kannada Unicode Consonants which are not properly joined with vowel sign UU: Those already listed above for U, plus GHA and LLA, due to the shorter height of the left-side ending node of this vowel sign. I think in most cases appropriate kerning should solve the problem, except for SSA + -U/-UU, GHA + -UU and LLA + -UU where separate glyphs would be advisable. It is curious to note that DDA DA and BA are all disjointed whereas their aspirated counterparts DDHA DHA and BHA which all have only an additional notch-like stroke at the bottom are correctly joined with the vowel sign. I think the LSB RSB values are carelessly allotted in some cases, unfortunately. Other problems: CU JU -- the pointed part on the left of the vowel sign U passes through the consonants and comes out above (see carefully) -- actually *negative* kerning is needed here so that the pointed part should only enter the consonant and not again exit it. (It seems this problem does not occur for vowel sign UU due to the shorter height of the left-side ending node of this vowel sign which causes a problem with GHA and LLA instead -- see above!) Note: Unfortunately I will not be able to provide a TTF patch for this as I am already short of time on my official projects. Please take care of it. Thank you! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 11

[Bug 839303] New: [ta_IN] Submission of glyphs for Tamil fractions/symbols to be included in the Lohit Tamil fonts
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=839303 Bug ID: 839303 QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: rawhide Priority: unspecified CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Summary: [ta_IN] Submission of glyphs for Tamil fractions/symbols to be included in the Lohit Tamil fonts Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: lohit-tamil-fonts Product: Fedora Created attachment 597580 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=597580&action=edit Lohit Tamil, Lohit Tamil Classical and Lohit Tamil Chart fonts with new characters Contributing new Tamil glyphs to Lohit Tamil family: ---------------------------------------------------- I have prepared a proposal to encode 62 characters for old Tamil fractions and symbols to be encoded in Unicode. Seven of these are being proposed for the Tamil BMP block and rest for a new Tamil Supplement block in the SMP. For the glyphs required for the code chart I have largely devised new glyphs based on existing Lohit Tamil glyphs under the derivative rights granted by the OFL. Some glyphs which could not be derived, I created myself using Inkscape and other tools. I would like to donate all these glyphs to the Lohit project under the OFL for eventual inclusion into the Lohit Tamil/Tamil Classical fonts. For now they may be included in the PUA of an unofficial fork of the Lohit Tamil fonts. When they are eventually encoded in Unicode, they may be officially mapped to the new codepoints and included in the official distribution of the Lohit Tamil/Tamil Classical fonts. Using Lohit Tamil glyphs for Unicode code chart: ------------------------------------------------ In the proposal, I am also requesting the Unicode / ISO 10646 project editors to use the Lohit Tamil font for the Unicode Tamil code charts (Tamil block, and newly proposed Tamil Supplement block) because: 1) When the new characters are encoded and my glyphs used for the code chart, it would look good to maintain stylistic uniformity in the code chart, and my designed glyphs are stylistically like the Lohit Tamil glyphs as they are mostly derived from them. So it would be good to use Lohit Tamil glyphs throughout. 2) There are currently 72 Tamil characters in Unicode 6.1.0. The present proposal almost doubles the number with 62 new characters. It would be a significant and unnecessary effort for anyone else to duplicate my glyph design work for so many characters to keep in with the current Tamil code chart font style. So switching to Lohit Tamil for all glyphs is easier and advisable. 3) Personally I think the glyphs of Lohit Tamil are much "cleaner" than the existing Tamil code chart font, and more representative of the nature and beauty of the Tamil script. 4) The OFL already permits the use of the Lohit Tamil font (and its derivatives) for any purpose, so there are (hopefully) no legal issues pertaining which need to be cleared between Unicode and Red Hat (but of course, IANAL). I also sincerely request the cooperation of the Lohit / Fedora / Red Hat people in permitting the Lohit Tamil glyphs to be used for the Unicode Tamil code charts (i.e. for two blocks). Fonts with new glyphs: ---------------------- I attach herewith a ZIP file containing three font files: 1) Lohit Tamil font, with newly proposed character glyphs mapped to the PUA. 2) Lohit Tamil Classical font, likewise. 3) Lohit Tamil Chart font, containing only glyphs required for the code chart (for existing and new characters, totalling 134 in number, across two blocks Tamil and Tamil Supplement) mapped to the existing and proposed characters for convenience of Unicode / ISO 10646 editors. Behaviour of new characters and requirement from the fonts' side: ----------------------------------------------------------------- None of the newly proposed characters are combining characters in the sense of combining marks. However, most of them are proposed for a new SMP Tamil block and care might need to be taken for proper mapping so that on all platforms the SMP characters are accessible. There is only one sequence of characters which needs to ligate: TAMIL DIGIT ONE ௧ + TAMIL SIGN KALAM (which looks like TAMIL LETTER LLA ள) should always ligate. I have also provided the ligature glyph after the glyphs for the individual characters (mapped to PUA E03F) in the fonts 1 and 2 above. I have not added any substitution mapping however as it is for now only temporarily in the PUA. Etcetera: --------- It is my intention to submit the proposal within a week or so and I will upload/link here a copy of the proposal. If at all any changes are required to the set of glyphs as a result of any feedback from scholars or other sources, I will upload fresh TTF font files. I thank everyone, especially Pravin Satpute, for their support regarding this. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 19

[Bug 841947] New: [te_IN] Add support for Telugu nakaarapollu and repha to Lohit Telugu font
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=841947 Bug ID: 841947 QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org Severity: unspecified Version: rawhide Priority: unspecified CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Summary: [te_IN] Add support for Telugu nakaarapollu and repha to Lohit Telugu font Regression: --- Story Points: --- Classification: Fedora OS: Unspecified Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com Type: Bug Documentation: --- Hardware: Unspecified Mount Type: --- Status: NEW Component: lohit-telugu-fonts Product: Fedora Created attachment 599423 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=599423&action=edit Glyphs for Telugu nakaarapollu and repha Telugu script has special form of vowelless NA called four-pronged nakaarapollu. Strictly speaking nakaarapollu means nakaara + pollu=virama so regular form of vowelless-NA న్ is also nakaarapollu but Telugu old grammarian Brown has specifically called a distinct form as nakaarapollu. The recommended model for getting Telugu nakaarapollu is NA + ZWJ + VIRAMA. Please find more details in the document: https://sites.google.com/site/jamadagni/files/utcsubmissions/11409-telugu-n… Likewise Telugu script has old repha form which is not found in common usage in current Telugu script. A modern-style Telugu font can allow user to select old-style reph by using the sequence RA + VIRAMA + ZWJ + CONSONANT because the plain RA + VIRAMA + CONSONANT would be presented as RA with sub-base form of CONSONANT. Please find more details in the document: https://sites.google.com/site/jamadagni/files/utcsubmissions/12017-telugu-r… These two documents have been approved by the UTC in the Feb 2012 meeting: http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2012/12007.htm <quote> [130-A15] Action Item for Deborah Anderson, Editorial Committee: Update the core specification text on Telugu nakaara-pollu based on input in document L2/11-409. [130-A16] Action Item for Deborah Anderson: Incorporate text on Telugu Reph from L2/12-017 into the Telugu block description. </quote> It is requested to: 1) add the glyphs for nakaarapollu and repha to the Lohit Telugu font: 2) add substitution mapping of NA + ZWJ + VIRAMA to the nakaarapollu glyph 3) add requisite OT markups for repha glyph so that a compliant OT system can recognize the repha glyph and render sequence of RA + VIRAMA + ZWJ + CONS using that glyph. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 10

[Bug 982601] New: [ml_IN] Addition of glyphs to Lohit Malayalam to support recently proposed Unicode characters
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=982601 Bug ID: 982601 Summary: [ml_IN] Addition of glyphs to Lohit Malayalam to support recently proposed Unicode characters Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: lohit-malayalam-fonts Severity: unspecified Priority: unspecified Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: samjnaa(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 770964 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=770964&action=edit Glyphs for Malayalam Archaic II, minor fractions and Chillu LLL Recently I and Cibu Johny have proposed various characters to be added to the Malayalam Unicode block and in the last May 2013 UTC meeting they have been approved and further (IIUC) approved by the WG2 meeting last month in Lithunia. The links are provided below: N4429 Proposal to encode Malayalam minor fractions http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4429.pdf N4428 Proposal to encode MALAYALAM LETTER CHILLU LLL http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4428.pdf N4312 Proposal for MALAYALAM LETTER ARCHAIC II http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4312.pdf This is a placeholder bug (like bug #839303 for Tamil fractions and symbols) to ensure that the requisite glyphs are added immediately once the characters are published in the Unicode standard finally. I have designed the glyphs for these proposed characters partially based on existing glyphs from the Lohit Malayalam font and would like to submit these as my contributions to the Lohit project under the OFL. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=CqoPzu7D2p&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 19

[Bug 1076190] New: Rendering of Unicode tie bars could be improved
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1076190 Bug ID: 1076190 Summary: Rendering of Unicode tie bars could be improved Product: Fedora Version: 20 Component: liberation-fonts Severity: low Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: rkaldari(a)wikimedia.org QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 874108 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=874108&action=edit comparison between Liberation Sans and Helvetica Description of problem: The rendering of the two Unicode tie bar combining characters (U+035E and U+035F) is not ideal. In particular the characters are quite short and far away from the characters they are tying together. This makes it appear more like a misplaced macron than a tie bar. The rendering in Liberation Sans appears to be equivalent to that of Arial which has the same issues. The rendering in Helvetica is better (see attachment 1). In particular, because the under tie bar (U+035F) is so far away from the other characters, it sometimes gets clipped when rendered, as it appears to fall slightly outside of the bounding box for the line height (see attachment 2). My suggestion would be to make the length of both tie bars slightly longer, and to move both of them slightly closer to the characters they are intended to tie together. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 12-Mar-2014 (2.x) How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Install latest Liberation Sans (and Helvetica if you want to compare) 2. Go to https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Kaldari/Font_test_2 Actual results: Tie bars should be slightly longer and closer to the other characters. Expected results: Tie bar are quite short and far away. Additional info: See attachments for more info. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=4qagSOJtp5&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 16

[Bug 1084227] New: Arrow symbols too small and not nicely aligned
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1084227 Bug ID: 1084227 Summary: Arrow symbols too small and not nicely aligned Product: Fedora Version: 20 Component: liberation-fonts Assignee: psatpute(a)redhat.com Reporter: Eduard.Braun2(a)gmx.de QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, petersen(a)redhat.com, psatpute(a)redhat.com Created attachment 882471 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=882471&action=edit testcase with some exemplary arrows The arrow symbols contained in Liberation fonts seem to be too small and also a little mis-aligned. As an example consider the attached testcase which contains left/right/up/down arrows exemplarily. The attached screenshot is a rendering of this file to illustrate the issue: - The arrows are much to small making them hardly discernible, especially at small font sizes. - The horizontally aligned arrows are positioned too low (nearly at the baseline). - Also visible: Hinting for the vertically aligned arrows is bad. The screenshot was created with Firefox 28.0 on Windows 7. The installed version of the Liberation fonts is 2.00.1 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. Unsubscribe from this bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/token.cgi?t=kmf7UnRYux&a=cc_unsubscribe

2 12

[Bug 1409348] New: Some fonts (such as Droid Sans) don' t work anymore on some websites with Firefox
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1409348 Bug ID: 1409348 Summary: Some fonts (such as Droid Sans) don't work anymore on some websites with Firefox Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: google-droid-fonts Assignee: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net Reporter: nekohayo(a)gmail.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, hobbes1069(a)gmail.com, nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net, paul(a)frixxon.co.uk, tremble(a)tremble.org.uk Screenshot: https://bug1257709.bmoattachments.org/attachment.cgi?id=8731947 Sample website: http://jeff.ecchi.ca This website uses the Droid Sans fonts, but somehow Firefox I had originally filed a bug on Firefox at https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1257709 but from what I can see now this is actually a bug that is specific to Fedora—either Fedora's version of Firefox, or Fedora's version of the Google Droid fonts: - The issue does not occur on Firefox on other OSes (OpenSUSE Tumbleweed, Ubuntu, Mac OS X). - The issue does not occur if you do "dnf remove google-droid*" -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 6

[Bug 1398676] New: Pango sometimes shows a replacement character for space (U+0020) when a font lacks a space
by Red Hat Bugzilla 12 Dec '17

12 Dec '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1398676 Bug ID: 1398676 Summary: Pango sometimes shows a replacement character for space (U+0020) when a font lacks a space Product: Fedora Version: 25 Component: pango Assignee: tagoh(a)redhat.com Reporter: mfabian(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, i18n-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, tagoh(a)redhat.com Created attachment 1224372 --> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/attachment.cgi?id=1224372&action=edit pango-bug.png Tested on the released version of Fedora 25. pango-1.40.3-1.fc25.x86_64 When using a font which does not have a space, Pango may show a replacement character for space( U+0020). I’ll attach the file rovas.txt which has a first line containing only Old Hungarian script and a space. I’ll also attach an old Hungarian font taken from https://github.com/OldHungarian/old-hungarian-font/releases which lacks a space. Display the test file like this: pango-view --font="Old Hungarian" ~/rovas.txt And you get something as in the also attached screenshot which shows that Pango renders the space as an replacement character. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 12

[Bug 1319249] New: incorrect use of Requires(pre)?
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Nov '17

22 Nov '17

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1319249 Bug ID: 1319249 Summary: incorrect use of Requires(pre)? Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Component: ghostscript-fonts Assignee: twaugh(a)redhat.com Reporter: jsilhan(a)redhat.com QA Contact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: fonts-bugs(a)lists.fedoraproject.org, twaugh(a)redhat.com We've identified your package for having `Requires(pre)` RPM flag without `Requires` [1]. `Requires(pre)` rpm tag could be interpreted wrongly, so to prevent any harm to Fedora users I am notifying you about this fact. Any package that is specified in `Requires(pre)` could be freely removed. Citing from RPM pages: ``` If there are no other dependencies on the package providing /usr/sbin/useradd, that package is permitted to be removed from the system after installation(!) ``` [2] If you really rely on dependency just during the installation process and your package don't necessary require the dependency for the proper run of your application then ignore this bug report and close it as NOTABUG. Otherwise add to your spec file additional `Requires` for the dependency, please. [1] paste.fedoraproject.org/341611/82208431 [2] http://www.rpm.org/wiki/PackagerDocs/MoreOnDependencies -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 3

[Bug 477389] New: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines
by Red Hat Bugzilla 22 Nov '17

22 Nov '17

Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional comments should be made in the comments box of this bug. Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=477389 Summary: Please convert to new font packaging guidelines Product: Fedora Version: rawhide Platform: All OS/Version: Linux Status: NEW Severity: medium Priority: medium Component: ghostscript-fonts AssignedTo: twaugh(a)redhat.com ReportedBy: nicolas.mailhot(a)laposte.net QAContact: extras-qa(a)fedoraproject.org CC: twaugh(a)redhat.com, fedora-fonts-bugs-list(a)redhat.com Classification: Fedora This bug has been filed because we've detected your package includes one or several font files: repoquery -C --repoid=rawhide -f '*.ttf' -f '*.otf' -f '*.pfb' -f '*.pfa' --qf='%{SOURCERPM}\n' |sed -e 's+-[0-9.-]*\.fc[123456789]\(.*\)src.rpm++g'|sort|uniq Unfortunately the script does not detect symlinks to other packages, so if that's your case, you can close this bug report now. Otherwise, you should know that: - Fedora guidelines demand the packaging of fonts in a separate package or subpackage: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Avoid_bundling_of_fonts_… - our font packaging guidelines recently changed, and every package that ships fonts must be adapted to the new templates available in the fontpackages-devel package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Fonts_packaging_automation_(2… http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_fonts_policy_package http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Simple_fonts_spec_template http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_for_multiple_fonts Please make your package conform to the current guidelines in rawhide. If your package is not principaly a font package, depending on a separate font package or subpackage is the prefered solution. If your application does not use fontconfig you can always package symlinks to the files provided by the font package and installed in the correct fontconfig directories. It is preferred to make a font package or subpackage per font family, though it is not currently a hard guidelines requirement (it may become before Fedora 11 is released). The definition of a font family is given on http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fonts_spec_template_notes/font-family The new templates should make the creation of font subpackages easy and safe. The following packages have already been converted and can serve as examples: - andika-fonts - apanov-heuristica-fonts - bitstream-vera-fonts - charis-fonts - dejavu-fonts - ecolier-court-fonts - edrip-fonts - gfs-ambrosia-fonts - gfs-artemisia-fonts - gfs-baskerville-fonts - gfs-bodoni-classic-fonts - gfs-bodoni-fonts - gfs-complutum-fonts - gfs-didot-classic-fonts - gfs-didot-fonts - gfs-eustace-fonts - gfs-fleischman-fonts - gfs-garaldus-fonts - gfs-gazis-fonts - gfs-jackson-fonts - gfs-neohellenic-fonts - gfs-nicefore-fonts - gfs-olga-fonts - gfs-porson-fonts - gfs-solomos-fonts - gfs-theokritos-fonts - stix-fonts - yanone-kaffeesatz-fonts If you have any remaining questions about the new guidelines please ask them on fedora-fonts-list at redhat.com -- Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.

2 12

← Newer
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Older →

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts-bugs June 2017