> Let me just make sure I understand your point. Are the following fonts
> (-watanabe-mincho-....iso8859-1 and > -watanabe-mincho-.....jisx0208.1983-0) > two separate fonts or a single font? > watanabe-mincho.ttf -watanabe-mincho-medium-r-normal--0-0-0-0-c-0-iso8859-1 > watanabe-mincho.ttf -watanabe-mincho-medium-r-normal--0-0-0-0-c-0-jisx0208. 1983-0 > Does the XLFD definition of '-c-' font prevent them from having two > different widths (*all* the glyphs in the second one are twice as wide > as *all* the glyphs in the first one) ? If yes, I have no more to say. > If not, I think my point still stands. My understanding is that since those two XLFDs are coming from the same watanabe-mincho.ttf and you declare both are '-c-' fonts, then the width of the two XLFDs are really the same. Even though you think "all the glyphs in the second one are twice as wide as all the glyphs in the first one" - which is not correct. I don't think freetype module looks at encoding field while determining the width of charcell font. This brings up a question: can we make freetype module look at encoding field while determining the width of the charcell font? Strictly speaking, it is wrong to specify '-c-' here because the ttf font is really NOT charcell font. It is sort of "cheating" but in practice it has to be done otherwise it is just way TOO slow to load a new font, or a new size of a existing font. _______________________________________________ I18n mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/i18n
