(reducing CC list to the acceptable minimum) Quoting Keith Packard (email@example.com): > The main 'improvement' that should be made in dejavu is to remove glyphs > which are not part of the core latin set; mixing multiple character sets > into a single font precludes people from choosing a more suitable face > for non-Latin languages. Also, most of the added glyphs do not have the > same quality of hinting as the original set, which makes them less > desirable on the screen. Hmm, Keith, with all due respect, what does make you think that Dejavu is providing "low quality" glyphs in the non-Latin ranges? From my understanding of the goals of DejaVu, providing a wide coverage *without making compromises on quality* is the main goal of this project. Davide Viti, the Debian maintainer of the font, can probably bring more light on this as he is in close touch with DejaVu upstream. What you mention would certainly more apply to the FreeFont fontset, which has often been criticized for the low quality of its glyphs in several ranges. Even this is probably less true now as the new maintainer of Freefont is doing efforts to reduce that problem. I think we needs fonts with a very wide coverage, to be able to provide to those who don't want gazillion of packages on their systems. Of course, specialized fonts might be wished for some ranges in order to better foxus on the quality of the targeted ranges....but that's not incompatible with wide coverage fonts.
Description: Digital signature