fonts December 2012

fonts@lists.fedoraproject.org

8 participants
7 discussions

Re: [Lohit-devel-list] Planning to drop Reserved Font Name (RFN) from OFL.txt
by Richard Fontana 28 Dec '12

28 Dec '12

On Fri, Dec 28, 2012 at 11:30:35AM +0530, Shriramana Sharma wrote: > As for trademarks vs RFNs, I suppose trademark (as applied to fonts) > is just a more official legalized version of RFN. Effectively both TMs > and RFNs say "you can't use this name for anything other than what I'm > distributing to you unless you have my permission". I suppose the > Firefox/Iceweasel thing would be a appropriate precedent in this. There is a subtle difference here. SIL OFL says: No Modified Version of the Font Software may use the Reserved Font Name(s) unless explicit written permission is granted by the corresponding Copyright Holder. I read this as meaning that if a Modified Version uses the RFN, the person exercising the copyright permissions granted by the SIL OFL loses their copyright license. Whereas without the RFN designation, the font licensor may still have trademark ownership of the font name, and some modifications might infringe the trademark. But that's true of software names too. Anyway, free software licenses do fine without RFN-style clauses (I can only think of a few, rarely used licenses that have something like them). > Anyhow, all this is general stuff. As for the Lohit fonts (to which I > have also contributed my mite in Tamil and Devanagari) I have no > objections to removing the RFN if the project maintainers and other > contributors feel like it, but I think that one should not replace the > RFN with a trademark notice as then the removal of the RFN would be > meaningless. As previously noted I do not agree that removal of RFN is made meaningless merely by inclusion of a trademark notice. - RF

1 0

Planning to drop Reserved Font Name (RFN) from OFL.txt
by Pravin Satpute 28 Dec '12

28 Dec '12

Hi All, With the recent discussions on Fedora fonts list, we have decided to drop RFN from Lohit fonts. I have done changes in master branch. Bug related for Dropping RFN is at https://fedorahosted.org/lohit/ticket/8 Changes are: 1. Dropped RFN line from OFL.txt 2. Added Trademark line in COPYRIGHT file Will do release in next couple of days. Let me know if anyone has any suggestion in this regards. Regards, Pravin Satpute

3 7

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Packaging webfonts
by Nicolas Mailhot 15 Dec '12

15 Dec '12

Le Mer 12 décembre 2012 17:40, Miroslav Suchý a écrit : > I would like to package Liberation and OverPass web-fonts. > https://github.com/ui-alchemy/alchemy/tree/master/app/assets/fonts/alchemy > > We have those fonts in Fedora, but only as normal fonts, not as webfonts: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_typography#Web_fonts > > I did not seen any webfonts in Fedora yet (and neither in Debian). What > should be best place for those webfonts? Whatever for? webfonts have only been created as a form of light drm to induce proprietary foundries to publish their fonts (the weirdest parts of the OFL stem from the same objective). They are 100 % needless for free and open fonts. Woff does add you some additional compression, but if you're not using mod_deflate or similar in your web server nowadays you're doing it wrong (and mod_deflate will help with the rest of the web page). Don't let the zippy name induce you to cargo-cult and package the same thing in countless formats that will all require new package maintenance. We can't change history now, but I sometimes wonder if bending backyards with webfonts and ofl was really necessary, or if a clean free/open font license (with no weird warts) + the pressure of Firefox/Webkit supporting direct OTF/TTF linking, would not have achieved the same objectives with fewer dubious leftovers. (but kuddos for SIL and Mozilla, and every one else involved, for achieving as much and as fast anyway). Quoting your wikipedia page : > Linking to industry-standard TrueType (TTF) and OpenType (TTF/OTF) fonts > is supported by Mozilla Firefox 3.5+, Opera 10+,[13] Safari 3.1+,[14] > Google Chrome 4.0+.[15] Internet Explorer 9+ will support only those > fonts with embedding permissions set to installable.[16] (the ie part is new, MS used to swear it would never support TTF/OTF linking, but they had to align themselves with the market anyway, in a few years there won't be left any important browser on the market without OTF/OFL support). I'm pretty certain support for most webfont formats will be quietly dropped before the end of the decade since they don't add much except for additional smart font code that increases the browser attack surface. -- Nicolas Mailhot

1 0

Overpass Fonts licensing
by Richard Fontana 12 Dec '12

12 Dec '12

Hi there, In response to a well-articulated request by a developer, Red Hat is hereby dual-licensing Overpass Fonts[1] under the SIL Open Font License 1.1 (heretofore the license of the fonts) and the Apache License 2.0. This shall serve as a general public announcement. - RF [1]https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overpass_Fonts

5 9

Re: Liberation 2.0 Vs Liberation 1.0 (Need comments)
by pravin.d.s＠gmail.com 11 Dec '12

11 Dec '12

On 7 December 2012 18:00, Kamil Paral <kparal(a)redhat.com> wrote: > > No worries. Simply yum update will revert this change. :) > > Building liberation 1.07.2-11 with epoch for F18 > > Perfect, thanks Pravin. It's good to switch to a new technology, but just > when it is really ready, not sooner. I'm very glad about the decision that > was made. > This is not matter of readiness of technology. Liberation 2.0 is definitely ready. If you see the coverage of Liberation 2.0 it is 4 times to Liberation 1. - *Latest Version - Older Version* - 2302 (sans) - 667 - 2274 (mono) - 666 - 2303 (serif) - 662 1. We have reverted this only because problem of *backward compatibility*with hinting output. It is sad actually for hinting results of 600 characters, we are not able to provides Fedora users 1800 additional characters. 2. Main goal of Liberation fonts is to providing compatibility fonts for Windows fonts Arial, Times New Roam and Courier. Presently coverage of these Windows fonts is huge. So just think if documents cover other characters than existing coverage of Liberation, and someone open same document in Fedora, will user get his intended layout? are we still achieving our main goal of providing compatibility fonts to users? problem is something different and we need to think on that. I will see if i can do something for Fedora 19. Regards, Pravin Satpute

1 0

sponsor for Tobias Florek for adobe-source-code-pro fonts?
by Matthew Miller 07 Dec '12

07 Dec '12

Tobias Florek needs a sponsor. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=860249 -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>

1 0

Liberation 2.0 Vs Liberation 1.0 (Need comments)
by pravin.d.s＠gmail.com 06 Dec '12

06 Dec '12

Hi All, As you know Liberation 2.0 is one of the feature of Fedora 18. Recent analysis and comparison with Liberation 1 it is more clear that final output of Liberation 2.0 is not as sharp as it was with Liberation 1.0. Though both are from same vendor (Ascender Corporation) hinting bytecodes are different. Liberation2 already available in Fedora18 Beta, if one wants to install both fonts simultaneously Download [1] has liberation ttf with different family name, so one can have both version same time on Fedora. (cp to /usr/share/fonts/liberation and then fc-cache) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856239 , though bugzilla has more than 100 comments but if someone see to the attached screenshot will be sufficient for review. I did comparison of Fedora output with Windows7 as well. But on Windows results are totally different than Fedora. On Fedora 18 : http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/liberation/arial-sans2-sans1-arimo-testing2… (Here Sans2 = Liberation2 , San1 = Liberation1 and Arimo = Google Croscore) On Windows7 : http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/liberation/arial-sans2-sans1-arimo-testing2… On Fedora 18 : http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/liberation/arial-sans2-sans1-arimo-testing2… freetype-freeworld Xft.antialias: 1 Xft.dpi: 96 Xft.hinting: 1 *Xft.hintstyle: hintslight* Xft.lcdfilter: lcddefault *Xft.rgba: rgb*) In last 4 comments Mike Fabian has given even more better screenshot showing hinting bytecode which actually affects final output. http://pravin-s.blogspot.in/2012/12/liberation-20-and-liberatoin-10.htmlhas some more images Problem is subjectivity of hinting output, each users has different opinion. So just thinking whether we should defer this feature and once Liberation2 output matches with Liberation1 then only we can go with this feature. Thanks & Regards, Pravin Satpute 1. http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/liberation-fonts-ttf-1-07-2.tar.gz Note: Cross posting to fonts@ , i18n@ and tests@ list for more feedback

2 2

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts December 2012