Am Dienstag, den 27.08.2013, 18:11 +0200 schrieb Jonas Smedegaard: > Whoops - I had you mixed up with Reinhard Tartler. Sorry!
So, you mean Reinhard talked about font duplication in the archive? I doubt so, but I think that code duplication with regard to ffmpeg/libav is an isue to him. > It is not a single font name but a bundle, mimicking Postscript "base > 35" list. You can find them refered to as either "base" or "core" fonts, sometimes even as "standard" fonts. Google return 13 mio hits for "postscript 35 core fonts" and 24 mio hits for "postscript 35 base fonts" and 30 mio for "ghostscript 35 standard fonts". However, urw refers to them as "core35", Artifex refers to them as "base 35" [1], Adobe refers to them as "Core Font Set" [2]. Do you know what the official name is? [1] http://artifex.com/indexfont.htm [2] http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/font/TN5609.PS3_Fonts.pdf > ...or should we make a copy of the package called fonts-poppler? Bad example, maybe. Indeed, poppler provides supplementary encoding data in the "poppler-data" package. This data is in no way restricted to poppler, it is provided by others for use with poppler and the poppler project is the one who actually provides the data. See any parallels with ghostscript and the urw fonts? "fonts-ghostscript", anyone? ;) - Fabian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
