JS> Are the following fonts
JS> (-watanabe-mincho-....iso8859-1 and -watanabe-mincho-.....jisx0208.1983-0)
JS> two separate fonts or a single font?
They are two separate core X11 fonts that come from a single font file.
(Actually, to be pedantic, they describe an infinity of X11 font
instances following a uniform pattern, but let's forget about it.)
JS> Does the XLFD definition of '-c-' font prevent them from having two
JS> different widths (*all* the glyphs in the second one are twice as wide
JS> as *all* the glyphs in the first one) ?
No.
JS> If not, I think my point still stands.
Your point stands.
The problem is with the optimisation that the freetype backend does
for `-c-' fonts. In order to quickly determine the (uniform) glyph
metrics, the freetype backend reads the global metrics provided in the
font file at font open time. As the TTF format doesn't provide
metrics for subsets, there is nothing that can be done to provide
different metrics for different font instances.
I have thought of various ways to make the guessing smarter, and, if
you look carefully at the code of the freetype backend, there is a
certain amount of hairy infrastructure to allow other approaches.
However, all the ideas that I followed turned out to be worse than the
current scheme.
If you have any good ideas, I'll be glad to hear you, although, as
I've said, I don't believe that working on core fonts is a good idea
anymore.
Regards,
Juliusz
_______________________________________________
I18n mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/i18n
