On Fri, 13 May 2005 14:52:24 +0800 Chia I Wu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Fri, May 13, 2005 at 11:44:59AM +0900, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> I'm unfamiliar with this API and never checked the bolden result in >> detail, could you show some demo program?
>I've made a quick hack to ftview.c for demo. See applied patch. Great Thank you, soon I will test it. >> As you pointed out, most CJK font family does not provide "bold" style. >> I think "weight" (XXX-Light, XXX-Medium, XXX-Heavy etc) - may take >> similar role of it in the typographical viewpoint. >But no application take advantage of that to get better quality. >Also, the size of a Chinese font is very large, ranaging from 5MB to >25MB (the 25MB one includes glyphs of both traditional and simplicial >Chinese). I personally prefer synthesized bold than having all those >weights installed. Yes, I think your comment is exactly right in the viewpoint of desktop window systems and application on them. And, I suppose standardizing embolding API is not harmful against other FreeType functionalities. >> Considering there is such root of embolding request, I wonder whether >> FT_GlyphSlot_Embolden() API is already enough for the purpose. It does >> not receive much parameters to control embolding (am I misunderstanding?). >> I'm afraid several control parameters are requested in future, for example: >> >> * strength to embolding >I think this is important. >> * switch to enable/disable changing glyph metrics in embolding >> * switch to enable/disable embolding of bitmap font >I think glyph metrics should be changed automagically. Umm, yes, so, when fixed-width font is embolded, the result can be proportional? I think there are many X applications (terminal emulators and curses applications may be typical examples) which assumes/expects the Hanzi glyphs are always fixed to full-width, regardless with bold/oblique style. Therefore (if i'm not misunderstanding) switch to enable/disable changing glyph metrics is required. >Bitmap glyph should be emboldened automatically too. >As we are synthesizing, you know you can't expect a high-quality result, >thus it makes no difference which format the glyph is in. Yet I've not tested in detail, I have no strong objection at present. One of my anxiety is: in some UCS collective fonts, bitmap data is provided to partial glyphs. For example, TrueType font bundled in AIX has bitmap data for Hanzi, but no bitmap data for Bopomofo. >> * choosing embolding algorithm >> >BTW, I have done some experiment to embolden a bitmap glyph, by printing >the same glyph severial times (depending on strength), with starting >point shift to the right by 1 pixel each time. The result is ok. How do you think of embolding procedure for high-resolution output (like printing device) and vector device? Regards, mpsuzuki _______________________________________________ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
