Re: [g-i] Arabic / Persian fonts
On 2/17/06, Davide Viti <zinosat@tiscali.it> wrote:
> > Having looked again over the screenshots I made on the night of 21st
> > to 22nd of January, I suspect this conclusion might be erroneous,
> too
> > (notice the different look of the persian[1] and arabic[2] writing),
> > so I suggest ignoring this remark. (I'll wait for your ok, then
> remove
> > the remark from the wiki page)
>
> next week I plan to build a test iso which, besides the fixes I did in
> order
> to get Indic languages working, includes nazli fonts in place of
> ae_AlMohanad;
> this iso will include also nazlib.ttf (with the bold version of the
> glyphs).
>
> If this is going to work, I think we can say that we have a basic set
> of working
> fonts covering all current languages: can you confirm this?
I suppose this is ok, but looking over the wiki page I can see that we
don't have a confirmation for Greek and i seems we have still problems
with Vietnamese. (Although Konstantinos probably would have said
something if things didn't looked right).
Clytie, could you confirm infirm that Vietnamese is displayed
correctly once Davide has the new iso done?
--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein
Reply to: