fonts February 2010

fonts@lists.fedoraproject.org

10 participants
13 discussions

Weird behaviour: o is mis-rendered when a j is near
by Dominic Hopf 27 Feb '10

27 Feb '10

Hi all, a few weeks ago I discovered a bit weird behaviour with settings of 96dpi and a font-size of 8pt. Using a sans-serif font, e.g. DejaVu Sans the o is not rendered correctly in some words, in special "Projekt" or "projects", thus every time when a j is near. I'm running a Fedora 12 installation (from XFCE spin if that matters) with current updates. Please let me know if you're missing any additional information. I've reported this issue before to the GNOME Bugzilla [1], since I assumed it may be a pango issue, but as Behdad wrote there it's maybe not. Anyway, there are screenshots of different occurrences available: [2] Geany menubar [3] directory listing in Thunar [4] gedit [5] gedit [6] pango-view Behdad pointed me to the freetype mailing list before, there is a bit discussion you might also want to have a look at available on [7]. I don't know if this maybe also occurs on other distributions, so it may could be a Fedora specific issue. - That's why I'm letting you know by this mail. Maybe someone of you has an idea what could be wrong. Thanks very much in advance for your support! Best Regards, Dominic [1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=607159 [2] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=151549 [3] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=151550 [4] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=152263 [5] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=152265 [6] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/attachment.cgi?id=152268 [7] http://old.nabble.com/mis-rendered-o-when-a-j-is-near-to27342904.html -- Dominic Hopf <dmaphy(a)googlemail.com> http://dominichopf.de/ Key Fingerprint: A7DF C4FC 07AE 4DDC 5CA0 BD93 AAB0 6019 CA7D 868D

2 2

Epigrafica and Breip fonts are no longer in progress
by Paul Flo Williams 18 Feb '10

18 Feb '10

I've been going through the fonts that are marked as in progress for packaging in the wiki and comparing them to review requests in Bugzilla. To track what I was doing, I've made a table here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Frixxon (yeah, too lazy to even make a sub-page!) Of the older packages that were being reviewed, Epigrafica and Breip stalled quickly, after a first attempt at packaging by someone. I've emailed him this evening, and he has confirmed that he won't be correcting the work done so far. So, two things: 1. Breip and Epigrafica are back on the wishlist. Spot also started packaging Epigrafica, but stopped when he realised someone else was doing it. 2. As a newbie myself, I don't know how the review requests for these two should be closed, or who can do it, but it needs doing.

2 1

Re: fontconfig priorities for non-LGC fonts
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 17 Feb '10

17 Feb '10

----- "Jens Petersen" <petersen(a)redhat.com> wrote: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fontconfig_packaging_tips#Choosing_a_ruleset_… > upstream's 65-nonlatin.conf is at the front of the 65-69 block. > > This seems to largely make it impossible to override "nonlatin" fonts > sometimes in fedora. If we could at least move 65-nonlatin.conf to say 67 (or 69 even?) for F13 that would allow us to keep wqy-zenhei-fonts as a default Chinese font otherwise we have to revert to cjkuni before f13 Beta. Jens

2 1

Re: fontconfig priorities for non-LGC fonts
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 17 Feb '10

17 Feb '10

1 1

Re: fontconfig priorities for non-LGC fonts
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 17 Feb '10

17 Feb '10

1 0

Re: fontconfig priorities for non-LGC fonts
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 17 Feb '10

17 Feb '10

----- "Jens Petersen" <petersen(a)redhat.com> wrote: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fontconfig_packaging_tips#Choosing_a_ruleset_… > upstream's 65-nonlatin.conf is at the front of the 65-69 block. > > This seems to largely make it impossible to override "nonlatin" fonts > sometimes in fedora. If we could at least move 65-nonlatin.conf to 67 say for F13 that would allow us to keep wqy-zenhei-fonts as a default Chinese font otherwise we have to revert to cjkuni before f13 Beta. Jens

1 0

fontconfig priorities for non-LGC fonts
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 15 Feb '10

15 Feb '10

Hi, We seem to be lacking space in the priority prefixes for fontconfig .conf files for non-LGC fonts (aka nonlatin); maybe others too? http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fontconfig_packaging_tips#Choosing_a_ruleset_… /usr/share/fontconfig/templates/fontconfig-priorities.txt in that upstream's 65-nonlatin.conf is at the front of the 65-69 block. This seems to largely make it impossible to override "nonlatin" fonts sometimes in fedora. While we would like to address this upstream with restructuring the space is there something we can do now in fedora for this for f13? We need a fix before beta if we want to stop wqy-zenhei from overriding vlgothic for Japanese. Thoughts, comments? Jens ps Overall 50-69 seems quite a narrow space for the range of fonts we have on hand now.

2 1

Packaging Ubuntu title fonts
by Paul Flo Williams 12 Feb '10

12 Feb '10

I'm starting on my first font package right now. I've picked Ubuntu title fonts because I've taken a look at upstream and the archive file looks very neat, and it is a simple package with only one font style. As this is my first package of any type, I expect I'll have questions shortly, but I just thought for now I'd say that the font is in progress.

2 2

Releasing Lohit Devanagari Today!!
by pravin.d.s＠gmail.com 05 Feb '10

05 Feb '10

Hi All, I am going to release lohit-Devanagari today, presently we have Marathi, Hindi, Nepali, Maitreya, kashmiri (Dev), Sindhi (Dev) Devanagari script base fonts, and all are same, there was plan to add/modify respective font as per each language requirement but having a super set is no problem and we are following that presently But somehow while discussing more on it, i found it we can use only Devanagari font for all without affecting any language other requirement, and also it will be better for development and maintenance as well. In future if we found that two language with same script, requires different representation of same characters either we can use <LANG> tag of Open Type or We can split font that time as per requirement so to the best of my knowledge there is no problem in using same Devanagari script covering all Unicode characters for all languages using Devanagari script. comment/suggestions are welcome Thanks, Pravin S

5 12

Re: [Lohit-devel-list] Releasing Lohit Devanagari Today!!
by pravin.d.s＠gmail.com 04 Feb '10

04 Feb '10

On 4 February 2010 04:00, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad(a)redhat.com> wrote: > On 02/03/2010 12:48 AM, प्रविण सातपुते wrote: > > > > Language codes are possible, but most software cannot deal with that. > > This is irrelevant. Pango supports it, and HarfBuzz will do also. Other > software can be fixed. > thats nice in that case considering future of harfbuzz (one rendering engine for all), IMO approach <LANG>/locl looks good - Pravin S

1 0

Re: [Lohit-devel-list] Releasing Lohit Devanagari Today!!
by "Arne Götje (高盛華)" 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

Behdad Esfahbod wrote: > On 02/03/2010 12:48 AM, प्रविण सातपुते wrote: >> Language codes are possible, but most software cannot deal with that. > > This is irrelevant. Pango supports it, and HarfBuzz will do also. Other > software can be fixed. > > behdad Up-to-date oo.o 3.2 and qt4 do not support locl. :( But they do support .ttc files. Cheers Arne -- Arne Götje (高盛華) <arne(a)linux.org.tw> PGP/GnuPG key: 1024D/685D1E8C Fingerprint: 2056 F6B7 DEA8 B478 311F 1C34 6E9F D06E 685D 1E8C Key available at wwwkeys.pgp.net. Encrypted e-mail preferred.

1 0

Miso fonts - need some font expert help
by Máirín Duffy 03 Feb '10

03 Feb '10

Hi folks! I've been having a conversation with Mårten Nettelbladt over email lately. He is the creator of the freeware font Miso: http://www.fontsquirrel.com/fonts/Miso We've been discussing the possibility of Mårten relicensing Miso under a Fedora-compatible font license. Mårten is amenable to such a license, but he very rightly has a concern about some issues with the font he'd like to correct before spreading the font far and wide with such a license. He doesn't have the time, however, to work much on the font anymore so he needs some help in getting them fixed. I think he would be doing us a great favor to open up the font license, so if we can chip in and help him out we can help each other. I was wondering if anyone on the list would be willing to help address these issues, or even just provide instruction that I or someone else on the Fedora design team could use (since we are not experts on these points of fonts) to address them ourselves? Here are the issues Mårten raised that he'd like help addressing - does anyone have ideas on how to do any of these? (Some of these are suggestions he's gotten from users - are they the right way to do it? E.g., the otf file naming suggestion?) - The OTF file to all lower case and use the same base name for the regular as in the TTF files. This would result in miso-reg.otf, miso-bol.otf and mis-lig.otf. - For fontconfig (which is used on Linux) it would be better the family and style for the light font would be slightly altered. This would result in "family=Miso Light" and "style=Regular", in stead of "family=Miso" and "style=Light" because most of the software only recognizes Regular, Bold, Italic and Bold Italic and does not know how to make a Light available. Unless, it would be available as "Miso Light ~ Regular". - Provide URL Vendor in the OTF and TTF metadata for all fonts. - Provide PANOSE metadata, see http://panose.com/ProductsServices/pan1.aspx . Especially Family Kind (2) Serif Style (15) would greatly improve selection of this font via tools like fontmatrix. - Offer an Italic and Bold Italic for Miso and an Italic for Miso Light. Probably for such a type, these will be simply slanted. However, when you do it (instead of a fake italic which is slanted with a default value of the software using your type) you are able to control the angle of the italic versions. - Also, the TTF-files are the originals and they were converted to OTF by someone. Some people have reported trouble with the spacing of "c" "John" said: (http://www.omkrets.se/miso-spotted/#comment-117) using true type resolve problem also in xpress - So, that would have to be fixed as well, perhaps just a new conversion, or create OTF files directly from the font software. I used TypeTool and it didn't have that option. This font is a very attractive-looking font, good for use in logos, and I think this is a great opportunity to add a nice openly-licensed font to Fedora. Even if you don't have the time to help us fix these, if you know what we can do to fix them, sharing that expertise with us would be a big help. Thanks, ~m

3 3

fontforge update for f12?
by Kevin Fenzi 01 Feb '10

01 Feb '10

Greetings. What would folks think about me updating fontforge in f12? I need to push an update to fix: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=560277 Currently f12 has: fontforge-20090622-2 The current version is: fontforge-20090923-2 Anyone prefer I don't update? If so, I can backport the python patch I have instead of updating versions. Thoughts? kevin

2 2

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts February 2010