Markus Kuhn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Owen Taylor wrote on 2002-08-20 14:50 UTC:
> > > I'm afraid that a vast majority of programs and OS currently using TTF
> > > simple expect them to always have scalable glyphs; what will happen
> > > if one of such programs tries to use a bitmap only font for displaying
> > > at a size for xhich there are no bitmaps embedded ?
> >
> > I'm pretty sure Microsoft ships a number of .ttf files with only bitmaps and
> > no outlines with Windows...
>
> Can you name a few examples to substantiate that claim?
I believe I'm completely wrong about it :-)
I got confused because FreeType handles .FON files, so if you point
fontconfig at the fonts directory on your Windows partition, you get lots
of bitmap-only fonts that you have to handle. But they aren't TTF files.
The TrueType font format is certainly extraordinarily grotty. But
it is also complete in ways that most other font formats aren't.
(If we ever want to handle, say, bitmap Arabic fonts, then we really,
really want to be doing it using OpenType GSUB tables rather than
inventing new custom glyph encodings.)
And widely standard. As Keith says, we can't *not* support TrueType.
Regards,
Owebn
_______________________________________________
Fonts mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
