>> Yep, impressive work on the new release. >> And notice how font sources (FontLab) and the build script are also >> released. A very good sign :) > > yes, it is important to note that designers don't need to work > exclusively with free tools to collaborate with free software projects.
Yep, provided common open formats or non-destructive conversion filters can be used to go from one toolset to the other. I think progress is made in this area but more should probably be done to the benefit of all. Maybe through human-readable text-based formats instead of binary formats. > the build script is not functional, since it uses functions from a > module which is not publicly available. nothing that prevents anyone > from working on the font using his own tools though. > >> I'm re-contacting upstream - The Ubuntu/Canonical folks - to advocate >> officially hosting the "trunk" and the related project information >> somewhere (OFLB?) and allowing for the various interesting branches >> out >> there to be known and possibly merged back. A source repository and a >> FONTLOG are really needed IMHO. Of course I'll promote collaborative >> design through the OFL instead of the LGPL which is much more >> adapted to >> fonts not to mention readability. > > i don't think any of this is necessary to guarantee more work on the > font. quite the opposite – it obscures type-design issues with > technical complications, making it more difficult for designers to > participate. Well, reduction of the "technical complication" is the intent: clarifying who has done what in the various branches of the font project through a FONTLOG, a readme file, providing a public source repository, hosting branches, and having a more readable license designed for fonts that is community-validated can only help. There are various other branches out there: http://blog.opensyd.fr/public/fichiers/ubuntu-title-fr-1.1.ttf http://nitrofurano.linuxkafe.com/linux/UbuntuTitle_0706252006.zip https://wiki.ubuntu.com/CatalanTeam/Grafisme I doubt many designers will have read through the entire LGPL thoroughly and made the effort to understand completely how it fits font design practises before starting branching the font and redistributing it. I don't see how this will have the opposite effect but I'd be interested if you could explain what you have in mind. I'm open to being proved wrong :) > more important, in my oppinion, would be to get ressources and pay > christian (or another *skilled* type-designer) for continuing the > work on the font. Yes, funding open font design is something we're looking into. IIRC Andy was paid to work on this. Canonical may well pay again through a contract or a bounty. Other distros have paid designers. I expect bodies like the OLPC foundation will have big font design needs as well. But it's a fact that various designers/scripts engineers also do this for other reasons but collaboration can happen nonetheless. Some well-know designers have contributed to open fonts. I would say that it's a great way to make you skills known too. HTH -- Nicolas Spalinger http://scripts.sil.org http://pkg-fonts.alioth.debian.org/ https://launchpad.net/people/fonts
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Openfontlibrary mailing list Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
