Re: Bug#80458: Add fonts.dir for Chinese fonts (abiword 0.7.12)
- To: ha shao <hashao@chinese.com>
- Cc: Yasuhiro TAKE <take@debian.org>, Aaron Lehmann <aaronl@vitelus.com>, debian-i18n@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Bug#80458: Add fonts.dir for Chinese fonts (abiword 0.7.12)
- From: Anthony Fok <foka@debian.org>
- Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 02:26:06 -0700
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20010301022606.B10871@lovelife.olvc.ab.ca>
- In-reply-to: <20010301102050.A32738@hashao.ddts.net>; from hashao@chinese.com on Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 10:20:50AM +0800
- References: <E14WyUn-0002m4-00@jubilee.olvc.ab.ca> <87ae7afpyw.fsf@vitelus.com> <20010225171244.B12240@lovelife.olvc.ab.ca> <20010226123459.A9660@hashao.ddts.net> <20010228234034H.ytake@phys2.med.osaka-u.ac.jp> <20010301102050.A32738@hashao.ddts.net>
Hello all,
On Thu, Mar 01, 2001 at 10:20:50AM +0800, ha shao wrote:
> I think Anthony forgot to change GB-H to GB-EUC-H for bold and italic
> fonts. The GBK-EUC-H was copied from a fonts.dir put up by the original
> abiword cjk patch author. I think he uses Turbolinux Chinese edition which
> has GBK Chinese TTF fonts. Yes, I think for debian, it's better to use
> GB-EUC-H and B5-H for Simplified and Traditional Chinese respectively.
Actually, I noticed some inconsistencies, but since I know little about
Postscript fonts, I left it unchanged. They are left exactly the same as
what the CLE is currently using. http://cle.linux.org.tw/
So, I know they are wrong, but I don't know how to correct them either. :-)
--
Anthony Fok Tung-Ling Civil and Environmental Engineering
foka@ualberta.ca, foka@debian.org University of Alberta, Canada
Debian GNU/Linux Chinese Project -- http://www.debian.org/intl/zh/
Come visit Our Lady of Victory Camp -- http://www.olvc.ab.ca/
Reply to: