https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=159950
Eyal Rozenberg <eyalr...@gmx.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://bugs.documentfounda
| |tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=78
| |186,
| |https://bugs.documentfounda
| |tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=96
| |872,
| |https://bugs.documentfounda
| |tion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11
| |3496
--- Comment #11 from Eyal Rozenberg <eyalr...@gmx.com> ---
In the design meeting today, among other aspects of the discussion, Heiko asked
that we consider several bugs which, together with this one, might require some
merging/duping/consolidation. Those are:
Bug 78186: Way to know which fonts are used (resp. missing) in a document
Bug 96872: Make it more obvious that a font has been substituted
Bug 113496: Open source font installer bundles on download webpage per locale
Bug 146291: Allow to use substituted font as if it were installed
tl;dr: No dupes, no dependencies :-(
--------------------------------------------
Here's how I see the relations between these bugs and this one:
Bug 146291:
... is effectively unrelated, let's forget about it.
Bug 96872:
If this bug were implemented, the user opening a document with a missing font
would get a dialog or notification bar through which they will see the list of
missing fonts - and that's kind of obvious. (That list might be configured to
skip substituted fonts, but it might not.) On the other hand, one does not
necessarily remember that when editing the document and considering a specific
font in some paragraph, so the bugs don't obviate each other and don't really
have a dependency.
Bug 78186:
That bug is closer than bug 96872 to being a dependency of this one, as - for
this one, we definitely need to at least be able to show the user the list of
missing fonts, for choosing which if at all they want to have installed; and
perhaps to show which are available on-line and which aren't.
However - the UI that we would want might not be the minimum necessary for bug
78186; and I'm not certain that what this bug would need is to build upon
whatever work is done for bug 78186. So, no dependency, no duplication.
Bug 113496:
That bug suggests an alternative mechanism for achieving a somewhat-similar
effect of font installation.
* Resolving bug 96872 will not obviate this bug, since many fonts are either
not free for redistribution - but can be downloaded, and this is particularly
true for some of the popular ones from big commercial companies.
* In the other direction, resolving this bug doesn't obviate 96872, as this bug
will only see action when a font in an opened document is missing, but will not
offer additional fonts to users creating new documents.
* ... so the bugs can't be dupes of each other.
With that said - I believe that configuring online font repositories for
user-initiated downloads is a far more attractive notion than us curating,
storing, bundling and presenting numerous packages of fonts. A lot less effort,
and less licensing issues (if any). So even offering collections of per-locale
fonts would probably better be served by supporting online font repositories
like in this bug, and then adding the feature of downloading a bunch-of-fonts
in some locale from them.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
