Re: [Pkg-fonts-devel] New release: GNU FreeFont
Steve White wrote:
> Davide,
> The document in the link you gave is about "programs", and says "must
> include source code". But you do not do this for *all* files in your
distribution.
> Do you insist on source code for .png and .jpeg files? I don't think so.
> I contend that .ttf's are like picture files in this regard: they
> *are* the description of their contents.
In fact they are better in this regard than JPEG files! - If you open and
modify a JPEG file in a graphics editor you will lose quality. If you open and
modify a font file in a font editor, provided you don't change the outline
format, you won't loose any quality or information.
> This is in contrast to program code, which contains much more
> information than a compiled binary.
> We include program code because without it, we can't easily reproduce
> (or alter) the results.
> But this rationale fails in the case of picture files and .ttf files.
Yes!
The other reason for including program code is for portability - again not an
issue with TTF / OTF files which should be cross-platform.
If you do need for instance to read the OpenType tables (say because you want to
make an AAT/ATSUI version of an OpenType font) you can quite easily get them
from the final font-file itself.
> So I still think you should not bother with this step in the case of
> TrueType fonts. It is just an impediment.
I agree - The SFD source files may be nice to have - but they shouldn't be a
*requirement* and it shouldn't be necessary to build fonts in a distribution
from SFD sources.
regards
- Chris
*** VIRUS SCANNED by FASTLINK ISP ***
Reply to: