On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 23:27 +0100, Ben Weiner wrote: [...] > 'Typeface' refers to all the members of a visually related font family, This is usually called "typeface family"... where a typeace is a design and a font is an implementation of that design, whether in metal, wood, stone, or software...
> Typically the members of the family (each of which would traditionally > have been called a 'fount' or 'font') are regular/Roman, bold, italic, > etc. Do you have a reference here for such usage? Benton at ATF invented the term "family" to describe roman + italic + bold (and, later, bold italic) but a fount was always a single typeface in metal as I had understood the literature, e.g. Updike, Tracy, etc. > When we talk about 'fonts' on OFLB we should be referring to the files > in which the typeface family members are encoded. 100% agreed here. > Font files can now > contain any number of typeface family members, so perhaps these > multi-member files should be called 'typeface files' instead. Please don't do that -- US and UK law explicitly uses the terms "typeface" and "font" as I have described, from my non-lawyer reading; calling fonts typeface files might weaken their protection. Liam -- Liam Quin - XML Activity Lead, W3C, http://www.w3.org/People/Quin/ Pictures from old books: http://fromoldbooks.org/ Ankh: irc.sorcery.net irc.gnome.org www.advogato.org
