On Mar 14, 2014, at 5:31 AM, Reuben Thomas r...@sc3d.org wrote:
Free fonts will never match the quality of the fonts offered by top type
design foundries.
If he means “free fonts” as a whole, compared to “the fonts offered by top type
design foundries” as a whole, then maybe i can see
:)
thanks Frank.
I’m not anti slowness, just thought it would make an interesting subject for a
talk. Wherease yet another talk on ‘being efficient’… snore-dom!
As a painter as well as a font maker, i can appreciate the opposite of ‘quick
and easy’ too, but ‘efficiency’ does not allways give
Dave,
Do you have talks (or know of talks) planned from the ‘libre font’ area that
fit the call for presentations on how the gap between technical and design
development can be bridged” ?
I’m toying with the idea of submitting something like an “A non-experts guide
to making libre fonts,
oh. good one!
:)
On 5 Jan 2014, at 14:53, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
I’m toying with the idea of submitting something like an “A non-experts
guide to making libre fonts, quickly and easily”, suggesting workflows,
techniques, floss software, that can be used for anyone with
I’ve been wondering if the technology can be applied to other more interesting
uses.
On 18 Dec 2013, at 09:31, Richard Fink rfink0...@gmail.com wrote:
I had checked this out when Dave first posted it and I think it's dynamite. I
can't wait to see this done with other letterforms.
There
If it’s totally essential and function well, then i would say the extra % is
just a fact-of-life. But i would think that bundling a full pan-international
font into what is essentially a web-based framework, plus adding and
configuring all the extra to make that font function well across
I’m not sure i understand the reason for bundling in a font like that? Is it to
be used for the wordpress UI etc? If so then i can’t see the big deal in
fussing over the extra kb’s. Isn’t a default Wordpress install big enough that
the extra footprint of a single font family a non-issue?
-v
On 5 Nov 2013, at 10:52, noo...@aol.com wrote:
HAHAHA! Who iz Bruno Maag?
He runs a well known type design agency. He’s a loud critic of Free fonts. But
don’t get the wrong idea, i like him and admire the work he his agency does.
Just thought it would make a good specimen for JRUG_PUNK.
The criticism is usually based on around 2 things;
‘quality' and ‘money’.
The argument allways goes along the lines of; ‘all these free fonts are
lowering type design standards’, and, ‘all these free fonts are reducing the
traditional economic value of fonts’. I’m sure there’s some videos or 2
Challenge time :)
I’ll run it through Kernagic, you do it ‘your way'. We can judge whether the
results are useful.
-v
On 2 Nov 2013, at 08:46, rfink0...@gmail.com wrote:
Josefin's spacing is indeed out of whack. I agree with TP that it's broken
My specimen references some famous Gilbert George art pieces.
It’s good to see people making fonts like this. Type should be made from these
sort of marks too. I see them as liberational, and equally as beautiful as the
marks on the Trajan column.
Seriously.
-v
On 1 Nov 2013, at 18:28, Dave
Rich, your directness makes me laugh :D
There’s something of The Onion about all this; “Local man thoroughly
unimpressed by 30–40% of commercial fonts”. Didn’t they once run a story “Local
man shuns restaurant because of bad kerning in menu”?
also, talking of keeping objective, which is the
I’m not sure Quinn is after what you think he is :)
Quinn… do you mean you want to serve fonts like the example i am serving from
http://newtypography.net/testing/ ?
A.k.a you want your fonts to be served to remote web pages by simply adding a
'link href’ line to the head of the source html
I think we could assume that someone self hosting a handfull of fonts isn’t
likely to be pushing to billions of font calls, per font, every week.
Though it would be interesting to run an experiment and see what figures are
possible :)
On 29 Oct 2013, at 11:19, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com
http://garrickvanburen.com
612 325 9110
---
On Oct 29, 2013, at 4:25 PM, vernon adams wrote:
I think you are right.
Imo the web would be much more robust and fertile if type was even more
‘democratised’ and ‘autonomous’. The big web companies would be much
Of course, there is no theoretical reason, and no-one has actually said that
there should be a reason. The only good reasons i could cite, if i was debating
this issue, is that often fonts from from the ‘libre worlds’ are developed
within a very different framework to fonts developed in the
Hi Quinn!
I keep wanting to find this out too. IMO it’s the missing key to a typographic
revolution :)
You might want to look at https://github.com/garrickvanburen/Fontue
It is a few years old now.
Have you searched on github for ‘font server’ and ‘webfont server’ ??
Brings up a few
Along with
http://prototypo.io/
http://metapolator.com/
does anyone know what other similar automated font creator schemes are out
there are at the moment?
Many thanks
-vernon
Sure. I guess i mean a system that, either with or without input work, aims to
be able to automatically create arrays of glyphs and weights or any major
aspect of drawn features in a font that are normally done by a human.
Does that make sense ? :)
-v
On 20 Oct 2013, at 12:06, Thomas
Interesting thoughts (as usual) Eric. Thanks.
I think you are right about 'quality as paramount' being a just a 'strategy'.
It explains why some designers may consider themselves (and present
themeselves) as a purveyor of quality, and yet not necessarily provide such
paramount levels of
On 17 Oct 2013, at 02:39, Khaled Hosny khaledho...@eglug.org wrote:
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 01:15:44AM -0700, Vernon Adams wrote:
Pablo clearly 'gets it' :)
I assume that the response from people who dont get it would be that
you should have both; 'freedom' and 'quality', and i wouldn't
On 14 Oct 2013, at 15:18, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
Tom is just saying hey, use our stuff. Your stupid if you use that free
stuff.
No, he's not.
Yes he is, you just don't realise it ;) See how well it worked! It's the
subliminal subtext =8-)
hahah! I forgot about your 'font detective' talk ! :-)
Can i cheekily suggest you can now add a 'font police' talk too ;)
On 14 Oct 2013, at 18:03, vernon adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
Who rang the Font Police?
Well, yes and no. Technical quality and taste are not the same thing (of
course) but the aesthetic qualities of an object are as much a technical aspect
of that object, as is it's functionality, topography, ergonomics, etc etc. Only
the most fundamentalist 'engineer mind' would disagree with
That's a very good idea. It's a practise that would also help designers and
users in the area of version numbers for fonts too.
-v
On 25 Sep 2013, at 08:10, Victor Gaultney vt...@gaultney.org wrote:
3.8: Encouragement to use special names for fonts in development
My actual versioning system is itself only at 0.2.
v0.1 was a sort of incremental numbering based on a 'yeh whatever' start
version number.
With 0.2 i have been trying to keep to 0.01 when i first push a design to
github, remembering 'this is software source', and then going up, until i reach
On 7 Jun 2013, at 05:46, Victor Gaultney vt...@gaultney.org wrote:
The terms 'embedding' and 'distribution' have very specific meanings in the
OFL context, and are mutually exclusive. Here is a slightly expand form of
what is said in the FAQ:
Embedding = inclusion of font data solely for
On 7 Jun 2013, at 12:21, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 7 June 2013 13:45, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
to convert from my sources to a woff, is a clear 'modification', i would say.
The OFL FAQ and I both disagree with this; WOFF is simply compression
On 6 Jun 2013, at 12:23, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
Perhaps some browser developers would be interested in this?
Make an extension.
= ask others to make an extension
On 6 Jun 2013, at 12:43, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
http://code.google.com/p/web-font-downloader/ awaits
hurry up then
On 6 Jun 2013, at 21:20, rfink0...@gmail.com wrote:
Lastly - Vernon, I'm on your side, as far as your aims are concerned.
Totally. So don't get me wrong. But as somebody else wrote somewhere on this
thread or one closely associated with this topic: where in the license does
it say you've
I'm sure i saw an in-house blog post about the collaboration work with Omnibus
on Rosario too. Worth looking for again.
-v
On 4 Jun 2013, at 19:02, Pablo Impallari impall...@gmail.com wrote:
Good News:
Pablo Cosgaya asked Typekit to correct the Rosario page, and they have made
the changes
On 5 Jun 2013, at 05:38, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 4 June 2013 12:54, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
(a) webfonts, used by css linkage etc and (b) base64 encoded Woff files
placed in the users browser cache.
(a) works well. (b) really sucks. takes extra effort
On 5 Jun 2013, at 06:06, Khaled Hosny khaledho...@eglug.org wrote:
I personally see the mere use of @font-face as a form of embedding not
distribution
I think it's worth understanding that any use of a Libre font file in the
'public space' is a 'distribution'. That seems to me to be at the
And the OFL definition of 'embedding' is … ?
and does that definition tally with the situation of how fonts are being
distributed via 'embedding' in the real world? and will it likely tally with
the situation in say 2 years?
-vern
On 5 Jun 2013, at 08:46, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 5 Jun 2013, at 09:17, Victor Gaultney vt...@gaultney.org wrote:
And the OFL definition of 'embedding' is … ?
From the FAQ:
Question: 1.11 What do you mean by 'embedding'? How does that differ from
other means of distribution?
Answer: By 'embedding' we mean inclusion of the font
On 5 Jun 2013, at 09:59, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 5 June 2013 12:18, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
I see an opportunity to create more distribution points, and have as many
distributions as possible acting as primary distribution points :)
I do not.
You do
On 5 Jun 2013, at 11:50, Victor Gaultney vt...@gaultney.org wrote:
from the OFL definition, the uses of OFL fonts by Adobe, Monotype, etc IS
'embedding'...
Uh - not at all. …we mean inclusion of the font in a document or file… The
web fonts paper, again, talks all about this. :-)
Yes.
On 4 Jun 2013, at 09:27, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 4 June 2013 12:05, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
My point is not really to do with licensing (i know fonts can be embedded
under the OFL). But, i'm aware that embedding has not really been seen as a
'best
Dave - Haha, but not sure if you are joking or not :)
@Rich - I know what you mean, but i see things more round the another way. I'm
more interested in getting more and more freely available fonts into the hands
of more users, rather than creating fonts that are more legal object than
I have now contacted font pro.com about this. They promise to remedy the
situation.
The download packages, contain no OFL license.
-v
On 3 Jun 2013, at 12:27, Barry Schwartz chemoelect...@chemoelectric.org wrote:
IMO FontPro should be more explicit about licenses, because they offer
On 28 May 2013, at 02:24, Victor Gaultney v...@gaultney.org wrote:
On 27 May 2013, at 20:20, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
Is it not possible to include with a font, alongside the OFL, a 'pre-emptive
permission' text that gives the user the go-ahead to use the RFN named
On 28 May 2013, at 14:39, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
I think Victor has been quite clear that he's not at all interested in
diluting the OFL model like this, and I would not like to see such
additional permissions to the OFL floating around because I know that
software corporation's
...@lab6.com
On 28 May 2013 23:48, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
On 28 May 2013, at 14:39, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
I think Victor has been quite clear that he's not at all interested in
diluting the OFL model like this, and I would not like to see
Is it not possible to include with a font, alongside the OFL, a 'pre-emptive
permission' text that gives the user the go-ahead to use the RFN named in OFL
text when a font has been modified by subsetting, re-hinting, etc, (i would
have to think of the full list) ?? Seems a sensible solution to
Oh i see what you are saying now :)
Yes of course.
But the OFL prevents that particular freedom.
I've never understood the rationale of that aspect of the OFL.
Are you suggesting that restriction be removed from the OFL?
-vern
On 22 May 2013, at 17:15, Barry Schwartz
The RFN can have an integral role in how a designer can preserve or enhance a
certain type of freedom for a font. Or it simply restrict a font's freedom. I'm
still arguing with myself about it :)
Reserving the name of the font, sets down a licensing condition that must be
met. If that
Reserving the name of the font, sets down a licensing condition
that must be met. If that condition is not met then the license is breached.
This is clear when dealing with 1 or 2 a large corporations (who may
not be interested in preserving the font's freedom); as it gives 3 clear
On 23 May 2013, at 08:10, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 23 May 2013 16:49, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
The RFN part was probably not conceived as a copyleft
component of the OFL. My point though, is that it can (under
certain circumstances) also be used to preserve
I challenge Khaleds slightly 'straw man' comment :)
Fonts are functional utilities that include 'art work'. The fact that the 'art
work' of fonts may not be part of your interest in them, does not separate
function and art in fonts.
Ps - art work is functional utility too. It's a subset of the
On 23 May 2013, at 09:36, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 23 May 2013 02:43, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
Not sure i understand 100% what you are saying :)
specifically - Free software can be charged for; otherwise it is not free
as in
freedom
I am starting to prefer that the default position of RFN's in the OFL should be
preserved as it is now. Is the other option, to make the default 'no RFN'? IMO
the default of the RFN keeps a 'positive balance' in the court of the original
designer. Remember there is allways the choice of
On 22 May 2013, at 13:15, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
Hi,
On 22 May 2013 22:07, Vernon Adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
Or, is there something i am not understanding in this? :)
I think its unreasonable to expect every person publishing a blog who
makes their own subset
I might well do a little of that, not that i have any free time :) …but…
I'm very curious to see how desktop UI fonts render under this new freetype CFF
autohinter.
One thing i have noticed when testing UI fonts on android and Chrome (both use
a tweaked freetype) is that unhinted truetype
So (their) fonts would look better rendered on screens?
On 1 May 2013, at 16:44, Claus Eggers Sørensen clau...@gmail.com wrote:
Great, but why was this work done?
yep. I simply removed the parenthese from around the url links, so the links
worked.
Will add some proper comments later :)
On 16 Apr 2013, at 02:38, Raphaël Bastide raphael.bast...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
Here is a draft for a summary concerning the emerging projects around Libre
I have been thinking for a while (have i not mentioned it?) That I thought oflb
should have a bone fide web font server, where web authors can serve the fonts
with a single line in the head tag a la GWF.
-v
Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 25 December 2012 16:09, Alexandre Prokoudine
I can see that is an issue :-) but then you are looking only for future
developments that do not generate serious bandwidth. I wonder what sort of
bandwidth a full on oflb font server could generate?
Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 25 December 2012 21:11, vernon adams v
On Sep 4, 2012, at 10:07 AM, Thomas Phinney tphin...@cal.berkeley.edu wrote:
I think of all proprietary font development, you may very well be right.
i am right ;)
Yet, I believe (and hope I am correct) that a majority of type design *for
hire* is reasonably well paid. Most proprietary type
Thomas,
But surely the big chunk of proprietary font development is also carried out by
'less experienced designers', and/or designers that 'are young and don't have a
family to support', and/or 'live in countries with significantly lower income
expectations than the usa'. ? Those qualitities
I'm guessing you are having problems :)
Go to the menu item : File-Preferences-Generic
and make sure that 'ExportClipboard' is selected 'Off'.
Then you should be able to copy/paste glyphs.
-v
On 22 Nov 2011, at 21:48, Laval Chabon wrote:
Does anybody knows how to copy and paste from a glyph
Ah yes. Sorry i forgot.
The 0x06 error is from ttfautohint not being able to link to the newer freetype
libs. You need to create new symbolic links form 'libfreetype.so' to the latest
libfreetype that was installed. Sounds like the script Khaled pointed to is
best :)
-v
On 14 Nov 2011, at
Peter, Yes. Ubuntu 10.04 through to 11.10.
You can safely install Freetype 2.4.5+ manually into Ubuntu. Download the
freetype 2.4.5 source and run './configure', 'make', 'sudo make install'. In
my experience this was very simple in no way broke ubuntu.
-vern
On 13 Nov 2011, at 22:14, Peter
Is there a place to grab the fonts without signing up for Ubuntu
membership ;)
On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 15:38 -0400, Dave Crossland wrote:
http://fonttest.design.canonical.com/ is mentioned in
http://design.canonical.com/2010/07/the-ubuntu-font/ - nice :)
On Mon, 2010-07-12 at 16:32 -0400, Dave Crossland wrote:
On 12 July 2010 15:52, Dave Crossland d...@lab6.com wrote:
On 12 July 2010 15:49, vernon adams v...@newtypography.co.uk wrote:
Is there a place to grab the fonts without signing up for Ubuntu
membership ;)
http://www.google.ca
1. Cochin-Peignot inspired face with large xheight (i.e. kill those
ascenders)
2. definitely not Thermo type
:)
On Thu, 2010-06-24 at 16:21 -0500, Nathan Willis wrote:
Hi everyone;
I mentioned this to a couple of you individually at LGM this year, but
for everyone else, I decided I want to
On Fri, 2010-06-25 at 03:28 +0400, Alexandre Prokoudine wrote:
I wonder why you choose to work on a revival instead of an original
design in a specific genre, though? That seems more fun to me,
personally :-)
It's quite an interesting comment from someone with Reading background
:)
Yes
The onus is on open, not free. That seems to be in line with the oflb.
It's secondary that the software is free (as in ££$$).
On Fri, 2010-06-11 at 14:20 -0500, Barry Schwartz wrote:
It's not at all clear that the site has anything to do with free
software. The name of the site adds to the
Is this the same? Sophia Nubian is a Univers-like Nubian font.
http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsiitem_id=SophiaNubian#c5dd1b26
On Sun, 2010-05-30 at 17:56 +0200, Vincent W.J. van Gerven Oei wrote:
My plan/suggestion appeals to anyone who would be interested to (help)
How do you do this... ?
In the 'Glyph Info' dialog box there is a drop down choice menu for the 'Glyph
Name:'. Most of the time the default is human name, e.g. 'eacute' but when
extending the character set FontForge defaults to Unicode in place of human,
e.g. 'uni1EB1'
Is there a way to
Hi all,
Welcoming myself to the open font library.
Which is the main current useable front end to the openfont site? is it
openfontlibrary.org or the wiki page? i can upload font files to the Wiki
page (http://openfontlibrary.fontly.org/submit/typeface) but not via the
71 matches
Mail list logo
