Hi, At Wed, 14 Nov 2001 02:12:19 +0100 (CET), Markus Kuhn wrote:
> xterm is not suited for proportional or bi-width fonts. Split the font > up into a 8x16/16x16 pair, and there will be no problems. Just like > you have to do with Unifont. I'd like to know XTerm's policy. What is the reason of the (un)support of biwidth fonts like GNU Unifont and /efont/ ? Is it a policy of XTerm? Or, they will be supported in future? Otherwise, willing to accept patches to support them? I have no strong opinion on how biwidth (or doublewidth) fonts should be assembled. XFree86's doublewidth fonts don't contain singlewidth glyphs and they are exactly fixed width, while GNU Unifont and /efont/ contain both singlewidth and doublewidth glyphs. I don't know which is better. I even have no idea whether they should follow one united policy or not. However, it will benefit users if XTerm will support GNU Unifont and /efont/ as is. If a patch with tens of lines for XTerm can save time of millions of users, it is absolutely worth doing. If nobody is working on XTerm's support of GNU Unifont and /efont/, I'd like to research. Can anyone teach me where should I start to read the code of XTerm? --- 久保田智広 Tomohiro KUBOTA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.debian.or.jp/~kubota/ "Introduction to I18N" http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/intro-i18n/ -- Linux-UTF8: i18n of Linux on all levels Archive: http://mail.nl.linux.org/linux-utf8/
