Heads up: Droid fonts update in Rawhide

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Hi,

I've just pushed new Droid font packages to Fedora Rawhide.
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=330644

Droid are complex font families with a difficult upstream and the
following caveats apply:

A. I used a few hundred MiBs of Android git checkout as source. The fonts
are also available in the Google font directory but it does not permit
convenient checkout (one either needs to collect download URLs
file-by-file, or perform a full-repository multi-gig mercurial checkout),
its relationship with android as upstream is unclear, and it has been
known to cut-down fonts to limit their weight when used in CSS files. As
for other web sites, they are generally more convenient, but their
upstream status is unclear, and they love to zap licensing terms to
“simplify” their users' lives (even in Google-sponsored sites). So I
concluded that what was good enough for Android was good enough for us.

B. The fonts follow Keith Packard's “one font per script” ideal but I
seriously question if fontconfig as it exists today is ready to process
such an ideal. Expect to hit bugs in fontconfig or in apps with
approximative fontconfig calls (the first generation of this package
triggered a Chromium bug; Android uses its own font and font fallback tech
so those fonts are not heavily tested in a fontconfig environment).
Fedora fontconfig files for Droid are available here:
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=google-droid-fonts.git;a=tree

C. I tried to dispatch the Arabic variants in the Latin family they were
designed to complement, but I may have misunderstood the design info
available online.

D. Lots of new scripts here. i18n and l10n teams probably need to take a
look to decide it that changes font defaults for some locales, and if
compts changes are needed.

E. If the package description does not correctly attribute the main
designers involved, please educate me and I'll correct it.

F. I've zapped DroidSansFallbackFull DroidSansFallbackLegacy
DroidSansArabic DroidNaskh-Regular-SystemUI that seemed redundant. If they
 provide something missing in the other files, please tell me what it is
and I'll fix the packages.

And that's all for this notification. Needless to say for this level of
changes those packages will only be available in F18 after F18 QA and
won't ever be pushed to previous Fedora versions.

Best regards,

[Dave Crossland]

Hi!

The following is all my own personal opinion; I currently do some font
related consulting for Google Inc (mainly Web Fonts project) so I know
a little bit about these fonts, but this is NOT an official position
of the company in any way.

On 15 July 2012 21:42, Nicolas Mailhot  wrote:
> A. I used a few hundred MiBs of Android git checkout as source.

That's the canonical source for Droid, yes.

(The Roboto fonts in that repo has another canonical source,
http://developer.android.com/design/style/typography.html)
> The fonts are also available in the Google font directory but it
> does not permit convenient checkout (one either needs to collect
> download URLs file-by-file, or perform a full-repository multi-gig
> mercurial checkout)

Right, because its a repo for that project, not for the fonts used by
that project.
> its relationship with android as upstream is unclear

They are separate projects and while formally have the same parent
company, they may as well be different companies with no relationship
beyond their libre license.
> and it has been known to cut-down fonts to limit their weight
> when used in CSS files.

Right; its a repo of web fonts.
> As for other web sites, they are generally more convenient, but their
> upstream status is unclear, and they love to zap licensing terms to
> “simplify” their users' lives (even in Google-sponsored sites). So I
> concluded that what was good enough for Android was good enough for us.

:-)
> C. I tried to dispatch the Arabic variants in the Latin family they were
> designed to complement, but I may have misunderstood the design info
> available online.

Please clarify 'dispatch' :-)
> D. Lots of new scripts here. i18n and l10n teams probably need to take a
> look to decide it that changes font defaults for some locales, and if
> compts changes are needed.

:-)
> E. If the package description does not correctly attribute the main
> designers involved, please educate me and I'll correct it.

I'll see if I can find out more about this.
> F. I've zapped DroidSansFallbackFull DroidSansFallbackLegacy
> DroidSansArabic DroidNaskh-Regular-SystemUI that seemed redundant. If they
> provide something missing in the other files, please tell me what it is
> and I'll fix the packages.

The Fallback fonts have CJK glyphs and others character ranges not
found in the other fonts. The Legacy one can probably be forgotten.
The UI variants have adjusted vertical metrics to fit the Android UI's
vertical space limitations.

Cheers
Dave

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Hi Dave,

Thanks for the quick answer!
> On 15 July 2012 21:42, Nicolas Mailhot 
> wrote:
> > A. I used a few hundred MiBs of Android git checkout as source.
>
> That's the canonical source for Droid, yes.
>
> (The Roboto fonts in that repo has another canonical source,
> http://developer.android.com/design/style/typography.html)

Well that's one of the unhelpful Google web sites. Its zip informs you:

"You may use the materials in this file without restriction to develop
your apps and to use in your apps."

I haven't the faintest idea what that means legally. If I was mad enough
to package another set of Google fonts, I'd source Roboto from android git
like Droid, where it is clearly tagged with the Apache license.
> > its relationship with android as upstream is unclear
>
> They are separate projects and while formally have the same parent
> company, they may as well be different companies with no relationship
> beyond their libre license.

Nice clarification! (I suspected as much but the VCS histories were
unclear on when and why changes were propagated from one to the other)
> > C. I tried to dispatch the Arabic variants in the Latin family they were
> > designed to complement, but I may have misunderstood the design info
> > available online.
>
> Please clarify 'dispatch' :-)

Kufi with Sans (masquerading as the Arabic block of Droid Sans) and Naskh
with Serif the same way (see the long fontconfig ruleset I referenced)

http://www.29arabicletters.com/foundry/?m=1-1-1&fid=26
states Naskh was designed to complement Serif

and
https://code.google.com/p/chromium-os/issues/detail?id=17382
that chromium uses Kufi with Sans
> > E. If the package description does not correctly attribute the main
> > designers involved, please educate me and I'll correct it.
>
> I'll see if I can find out more about this.

That would be appreciated. I only found descriptions for the new Arabic
fonts.
> > F. I've zapped DroidSansFallbackFull DroidSansFallbackLegacy
> > DroidSansArabic DroidNaskh-Regular-SystemUI that seemed redundant. If
> > they
> > provide something missing in the other files, please tell me what it is
> > and I'll fix the packages.
>
> The Fallback fonts have CJK glyphs and others character ranges not
> found in the other fonts. The Legacy one can probably be forgotten.

I should have indicated I kept DroidSansFallback (no idea if it's missing
something important compared to DroidSansFallbackFull and
DroidSansFallbackLegacy)
> The UI variants have adjusted vertical metrics to fit the Android UI's
> vertical space limitations.

Ok that means they can be ignored on a desktop.

Thanks for the useful information!

Best regards,

[Fontconfig] Heads up: Droid fonts update in Rawhide

[Behdad Esfahbod]

On 07/15/2012 06:01 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > C. I tried to dispatch the Arabic variants in the Latin family they were
> > > > > designed to complement, but I may have misunderstood the design info
> > > > > available online.
> > >
> > > Please clarify 'dispatch' :-)
>
> Kufi with Sans (masquerading as the Arabic block of Droid Sans) and Naskh
> with Serif the same way (see the long fontconfig ruleset I referenced)
>
> http://www.29arabicletters.com/foundry/?m=1-1-1&fid=26
> states Naskh was designed to complement Serif
>
> and
> https://code.google.com/p/chromium-os/issues/detail?id=17382
> that chromium uses Kufi with Sans

That may have been the case, but it is my personal understanding that we
should dispatch Naskh with both Sans and Serif.  Kufi is a horrible font for
body text.

behdad

[Fontconfig] Heads up: Droid fonts update in Rawhide

[Nicolas Mailhot]

> On 07/15/2012 06:01 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > > C. I tried to dispatch the Arabic variants in the Latin family they
> > > > were
> > > > > > designed to complement, but I may have misunderstood the design
> > > >
> > > > info
> > > > > > available online.
> > > >
> > > > Please clarify 'dispatch' :-)
> >
> > Kufi with Sans (masquerading as the Arabic block of Droid Sans) and
> > Naskh
> > with Serif the same way (see the long fontconfig ruleset I referenced)
> >
> > http://www.29arabicletters.com/foundry/?m=1-1-1&fid=26
> > states Naskh was designed to complement Serif
> >
> > and
> > https://code.google.com/p/chromium-os/issues/detail?id=17382
> > that chromium uses Kufi with Sans
>
> That may have been the case, but it is my personal understanding that we
> should dispatch Naskh with both Sans and Serif.  Kufi is a horrible font
> for
> body text.

So make kufi a separate family and keep the old droid sans arabic for
sans? Or is it also horrible in some way?

Regards,

[Fontconfig] Heads up: Droid fonts update in Rawhide

[Nicolas Mailhot]

> > On 07/15/2012 06:01 PM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > > > > C. I tried to dispatch the Arabic variants in the Latin family they
> > > > > were
> > > > > > > designed to complement, but I may have misunderstood the design
> > > > >
> > > > > info
> > > > > > > available online.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please clarify 'dispatch' :-)
> > >
> > > Kufi with Sans (masquerading as the Arabic block of Droid Sans) and
> > > Naskh
> > > with Serif the same way (see the long fontconfig ruleset I referenced)
> > >
> > > http://www.29arabicletters.com/foundry/?m=1-1-1&fid=26
> > > states Naskh was designed to complement Serif
> > >
> > > and
> > > https://code.google.com/p/chromium-os/issues/detail?id=17382
> > > that chromium uses Kufi with Sans
> >
> > That may have been the case, but it is my personal understanding that we
> > should dispatch Naskh with both Sans and Serif.  Kufi is a horrible font
> > for
> > body text.
>
> So make kufi a separate family and keep the old droid sans arabic for
> sans? Or is it also horrible in some way?

BTW regardless of your answer here, with your former fontconfig maintainer
hat on, how do you make a font family masquerade as parts of two other
font families? If I understand the recipe you gave me for use in Fedora,
after Naskh has been morphed in Serif, it is not available anymore to
morph in Sans. That would be a useful operation to perform for cultures
which had not a western calligraphic separation culture

Regards,

[Fontconfig] Heads up: Droid fonts update in Rawhide

[Behdad Esfahbod]

On 07/16/2012 02:37 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> BTW regardless of your answer here, with your former fontconfig maintainer
> hat on, how do you make a font family masquerade as parts of two other
> font families? If I understand the recipe you gave me for use in Fedora,
> after Naskh has been morphed in Serif, it is not available anymore to
> morph in Sans. That would be a useful operation to perform for cultures
> which had not a western calligraphic separation culture

In the same recipe with match="scan", I *think* you can add multiple families
and remove the original one, instead of replacing it.

behdad

[Fontconfig] Heads up: Droid fonts update in Rawhide

[Behdad Esfahbod]

On 07/16/2012 02:00 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> So make kufi a separate family and keep the old droid sans arabic for
> sans? Or is it also horrible in some way?

I'd say yes.

behdad

[Fontconfig] Heads up: Droid fonts update in Rawhide

[Nicolas Mailhot]

Le Mer 25 juillet 2012 14:55, Behdad Esfahbod a écrit :
> On 07/16/2012 02:00 AM, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
> > So make kufi a separate family and keep the old droid sans arabic for
> > sans? Or is it also horrible in some way?
>
> I'd say yes.

Ok then I'll take it the changes in
http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/gitweb/?p=google-droid-fonts.git;a=tree
are ok for production use.

Need to find some brave arabic users to test your other suggestion