Re: [Openfontlibrary] Openfontlibrary Digest, Vol 34, Issue 13

2008-10-26 Thread Dave Crossland
2008/10/26 Brendan Ferguson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 After dong a little investigating, ccHost does allow you to see the
 contents of a zip file. I installed ccHost and then uploaded a zip
 file. The contents were there.

 Am I on the same page as you guys?

Yes; what it won't do is look inside .tar.gz or .tar.7z or .tar.bz2
archives - or plain .tar archives, even.

 I would not allow me to use all the other font files though

That's because its default settings are to only accept music files;
its meant to power the ccMixter site, you see. If you log into the
site as the admin user you can set the list of acceptable extensions
there.

 There
 should be an option to allow all files! Or perhaps exclude certain
 file types.

Well, AIUI, it has the feature to INclude certain file types, and it
excludes files with no extension.

 like PHP files or other files that could be excruciated on
 the server.

Yes, security is a problem :-(
___
Openfontlibrary mailing list
Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary


Re: [Openfontlibrary] Openfontlibrary Digest, Vol 34, Issue 13

2008-10-25 Thread Brendan Ferguson
I am very sure PHP can zip read zipped files, tarball and read  
tarballs. It really should not be a big deal expanding ccHost to do  
this.

Brendan


On Oct 25, 2008, at 12:54 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  wrote:

 Send Openfontlibrary mailing list submissions to
   openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org

 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
   http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 You can reach the person managing the list at
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
 than Re: Contents of Openfontlibrary digest...


 Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ed Trager)
   2. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Karl Berry)
   3. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Mark Leisher)
   4. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (George Williams)
   5. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Christopher Fynn)
   6. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Weiner)
   7. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Laenen)
   8. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Weiner)
   9. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Weiner)
  10. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Nicolas Mailhot)


 --

 Message: 1
 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:48:38 -0400
 From: Ed Trager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
 To: Ben Weiner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Open Font Library list openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
 Message-ID:
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

 Hi, Ben,

 Don't forget .ttc true type collections.  These will become more
 popular in the future, I am sure.

 I second Mark Leisher's suggestion to accept pcf and bdf.

 Some people are going to provide one font in multiple font containers:
 i.e., maybe ttf and pcf, or ttf and Postscript.

 But I agree with you that the older Postscript containers are not
 needed since OTF can contain Postscript outlines, right?

 Ben Laenen's question is relevant.  Perhaps the right tack is for OFLB
 to simply encourage inclusion of at least a ttf container.

 Note however there are legitimate use cases where .bdf or .pcf might
 be the first choice container -- for example, a monospaced bitmap
 terminal font for Linux, especially for a non-Latin script where there
 might not be other choices available.  Such a bitmap-only font should
 also be packaged in a TTF container, but the main file that will
 actually get used by people interested in that font is the bdf or pcf
 file.


 Best - Ed

 On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Ben Weiner  
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hi there,

 My proposal for OFLB font uploads in the next version of the site  
 is to
 accept

 .otf
 .ttf

 which are far and away going to be the most widely appreciated, then

 .pfa
 .pfm
 .pfb
 .afm
 .bdf

 which are Adobe-ish formats that are all in the current site: are  
 they
 all needed?

 Then the X-Windows format, if it is still in use:
 .pcf

 Then humna-readable source:
 .sfd

 What else? Metafont files (?.mf)?

 A short list is better, I think. Suggestions?

 Thanks,
 Ben

 ___
 Openfontlibrary mailing list
 Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary


 --

 Message: 2
 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:43:06 -0500
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry)
 Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

But I agree with you that the older Postscript containers are not
needed since OTF can contain Postscript outlines, right?

 Technically, sure, but pfb files are still very useful and widely used
 -- in the TeX world, at least.  Is anything substantial gained by
 disallowing them?  Actually, I don't see what's gained by disallowing
 anything.  And, as mentioned, people are really uploading zips anyway,
 right?

 Anyway, I haven't seen pfa files used in umpteen years, so if you'd  
 like
 to have a token format to drop, I suggest that one.

 karl


 --

 Message: 3
 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:12:12 -0600
 From: Mark Leisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
 To: Open Font Library list openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

 Ed Trager wrote:
 Note however there are legitimate use cases where .bdf or .pcf might
 be the first choice container -- for example, a monospaced bitmap
 terminal font for Linux, especially for a non-Latin script where  
 there
 might not be other choices available.  Such a bitmap-only font should
 also be packaged in a TTF container, but the main file that will
 actually get 

Re: [Openfontlibrary] Openfontlibrary Digest, Vol 34, Issue 13

2008-10-25 Thread Brendan Ferguson
After dong a little investigating, ccHost does allow you to see the  
contents of a zip file. I installed ccHost and then uploaded a zip  
file. The contents were there.

Am I on the same page as you guys?

I would not allow me to use all the other font files though. There  
should be an option to allow all files! Or perhaps exclude certain  
file types. like PHP files or other files that could be excruciated on  
the server.

Brendan



On Oct 25, 2008, at 12:54 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  wrote:

 Send Openfontlibrary mailing list submissions to
   openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org

 To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
   http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
 or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 You can reach the person managing the list at
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
 than Re: Contents of Openfontlibrary digest...


 Today's Topics:

   1. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ed Trager)
   2. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Karl Berry)
   3. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Mark Leisher)
   4. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (George Williams)
   5. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Christopher Fynn)
   6. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Weiner)
   7. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Laenen)
   8. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Weiner)
   9. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Weiner)
  10. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Nicolas Mailhot)


 --

 Message: 1
 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:48:38 -0400
 From: Ed Trager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
 To: Ben Weiner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: Open Font Library list openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
 Message-ID:
   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

 Hi, Ben,

 Don't forget .ttc true type collections.  These will become more
 popular in the future, I am sure.

 I second Mark Leisher's suggestion to accept pcf and bdf.

 Some people are going to provide one font in multiple font containers:
 i.e., maybe ttf and pcf, or ttf and Postscript.

 But I agree with you that the older Postscript containers are not
 needed since OTF can contain Postscript outlines, right?

 Ben Laenen's question is relevant.  Perhaps the right tack is for OFLB
 to simply encourage inclusion of at least a ttf container.

 Note however there are legitimate use cases where .bdf or .pcf might
 be the first choice container -- for example, a monospaced bitmap
 terminal font for Linux, especially for a non-Latin script where there
 might not be other choices available.  Such a bitmap-only font should
 also be packaged in a TTF container, but the main file that will
 actually get used by people interested in that font is the bdf or pcf
 file.


 Best - Ed

 On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Ben Weiner  
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Hi there,

 My proposal for OFLB font uploads in the next version of the site  
 is to
 accept

 .otf
 .ttf

 which are far and away going to be the most widely appreciated, then

 .pfa
 .pfm
 .pfb
 .afm
 .bdf

 which are Adobe-ish formats that are all in the current site: are  
 they
 all needed?

 Then the X-Windows format, if it is still in use:
 .pcf

 Then humna-readable source:
 .sfd

 What else? Metafont files (?.mf)?

 A short list is better, I think. Suggestions?

 Thanks,
 Ben

 ___
 Openfontlibrary mailing list
 Openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
 http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary


 --

 Message: 2
 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:43:06 -0500
 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Karl Berry)
 Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Cc: openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

But I agree with you that the older Postscript containers are not
needed since OTF can contain Postscript outlines, right?

 Technically, sure, but pfb files are still very useful and widely used
 -- in the TeX world, at least.  Is anything substantial gained by
 disallowing them?  Actually, I don't see what's gained by disallowing
 anything.  And, as mentioned, people are really uploading zips anyway,
 right?

 Anyway, I haven't seen pfa files used in umpteen years, so if you'd  
 like
 to have a token format to drop, I suggest that one.

 karl


 --

 Message: 3
 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:12:12 -0600
 From: Mark Leisher [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
 To: Open Font Library list openfontlibrary@lists.freedesktop.org
 Message-ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed

 Ed Trager wrote:
 Note however there are legitimate use cases where .bdf or .pcf might
 be