[Openfontlibrary] new release of the Ubuntu titling font

[George Williams]

On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 00:10, Christopher Fynn wrote:
> OK the closet thing to source code ma be something like the FontForge /
> FontLab file used to create the font *plus* additional things used like MS
> Volt project files, Adobe feature files,  python scripts, etc. 
Feature files can also be recreated from the font. I don't think the
results are any more cryptic than the original.
> Though you can 
> quibble about  details or particular fonts it is questionable whether *in most 
> cases* these "sources" contain much if anything that is very significant or 
> useful beyond what can easily be extracted from the font file itself.
I think you are right.

> What you may be missing are things like guidelines (usually easily extrapolated)
Or we can extend the format to hold them. But I tend to agree that if
your guideline is off by one em unit you aren't going to make serious
errors in font design.

> > Font data like point coordinates is, by nature, a machine-readable
> > kind of data and the binary formats would be okay to reverse but are
> > published formats anyway (afaik)
> 
> Yes the Type1, TrueType, CFF, OpenType and other font formats are publicly
> published.
That's why people like me can write font editors.

> IMO for *all* these reasons the need for having full original "source code" for 
> fonts is in no way compatible with the need for having source code for 
> executable programs.
I agree.