[Openfontlibrary] Openfontlibrary Digest, Vol 34, Issue 13

Brendan Ferguson drsassafras at gmail.com
Sat Oct 25 14:46:47 PDT 2008


I am very sure PHP can zip read zipped files, tarball and read  
tarballs. It really should not be a big deal expanding ccHost to do  
this.

Brendan


On Oct 25, 2008, at 12:54 PM, openfontlibrary-request at lists.freedesktop.org 
  wrote:

> Send Openfontlibrary mailing list submissions to
> 	openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	openfontlibrary-request at lists.freedesktop.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	openfontlibrary-owner at lists.freedesktop.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Openfontlibrary digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ed Trager)
>   2. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Karl Berry)
>   3. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Mark Leisher)
>   4. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (George Williams)
>   5. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Christopher Fynn)
>   6. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Weiner)
>   7. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Laenen)
>   8. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Weiner)
>   9. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Ben Weiner)
>  10. Re: Font formats accepted by OFLB (Nicolas Mailhot)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:48:38 -0400
> From: "Ed Trager" <ed.trager at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: "Ben Weiner" <ben at readingtype.org.uk>
> Cc: Open Font Library list <openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Message-ID:
> 	<416e2cf10810241348v752b5f9n5f5e570669713aca at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>
> Hi, Ben,
>
> Don't forget .ttc true type collections.  These will become more
> popular in the future, I am sure.
>
> I second Mark Leisher's suggestion to accept pcf and bdf.
>
> Some people are going to provide one font in multiple font containers:
> i.e., maybe ttf and pcf, or ttf and Postscript.
>
> But I agree with you that the older Postscript containers are not
> needed since OTF can contain Postscript outlines, right?
>
> Ben Laenen's question is relevant.  Perhaps the right tack is for OFLB
> to simply "encourage" inclusion of "at least" a ttf container.
>
> Note however there are legitimate use cases where .bdf or .pcf might
> be the first choice container -- for example, a monospaced bitmap
> terminal font for Linux, especially for a non-Latin script where there
> might not be other choices available.  Such a bitmap-only font should
> also be packaged in a TTF container, but the main file that will
> actually get used by people interested in that font is the bdf or pcf
> file.
>
>
> Best - Ed
>
> On Fri, Oct 24, 2008 at 12:00 PM, Ben Weiner  
> <ben at readingtype.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> My proposal for OFLB font uploads in the next version of the site  
>> is to
>> accept
>>
>> .otf
>> .ttf
>>
>> which are far and away going to be the most widely appreciated, then
>>
>> .pfa
>> .pfm
>> .pfb
>> .afm
>> .bdf
>>
>> which are Adobe-ish formats that are all in the current site: are  
>> they
>> all needed?
>>
>> Then the X-Windows format, if it is still in use:
>> .pcf
>>
>> Then humna-readable source:
>> .sfd
>>
>> What else? Metafont files (?.mf)?
>>
>> A short list is better, I think. Suggestions?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ben
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openfontlibrary mailing list
>> Openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org
>> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:43:06 -0500
> From: karl at freefriends.org (Karl Berry)
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: ed.trager at gmail.com
> Cc: openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org
> Message-ID: <200810242143.m9OLh6k28149 at f7.net>
>
>    But I agree with you that the older Postscript containers are not
>    needed since OTF can contain Postscript outlines, right?
>
> Technically, sure, but pfb files are still very useful and widely used
> -- in the TeX world, at least.  Is anything substantial gained by
> disallowing them?  Actually, I don't see what's gained by disallowing
> anything.  And, as mentioned, people are really uploading zips anyway,
> right?
>
> Anyway, I haven't seen pfa files used in umpteen years, so if you'd  
> like
> to have a token format to drop, I suggest that one.
>
> karl
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:12:12 -0600
> From: Mark Leisher <mleisher at math.nmsu.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: Open Font Library list <openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Message-ID: <4902483C.5010801 at math.nmsu.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Ed Trager wrote:
>> Note however there are legitimate use cases where .bdf or .pcf might
>> be the first choice container -- for example, a monospaced bitmap
>> terminal font for Linux, especially for a non-Latin script where  
>> there
>> might not be other choices available.  Such a bitmap-only font should
>> also be packaged in a TTF container, but the main file that will
>> actually get used by people interested in that font is the bdf or pcf
>> file.
>
> Actually, native Linux console bitmap fonts are PSF2 (.psf) fonts.  
> There
> are tools to convert BDF to PSF.
>
> Perhaps the category should be more general. Accept bitmap fonts.  
> Those
> that can be packaged in a TTF container should have the container and
> the original in the zip file.
>
> Side note: there is persistent user confusion over TTF fonts that only
> display properly in one size. They seldom understand they are using a
> bitmap font that only comes in one size.
> -- 
> Mark Leisher
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: 24 Oct 2008 20:41:21 -0700
> From: George Williams <gww at silcom.com>
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: Ed Trager <ed.trager at gmail.com>
> Cc: Open Font Library list <openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Message-ID: <1224906080.1522.21.camel at lynch>
> Content-Type: text/plain
>
> On Fri, 2008-10-24 at 13:48, Ed Trager wrote:
>> Such a bitmap-only font should
>> also be packaged in a TTF container,
> Um, there is no standard sfnt format for a bitmap only font.
>  Apple supports one format
>  X11 has its own format (and supports Apple's)
>  MS has NO bitmap only format.
>    (and does not support either Apple's or X11's)
>
> An sfnt container for a bdf file is a bad idea unless you are very
> specific about what system you intend it to be used on.
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 11:01:08 +0600
> From: Christopher Fynn <cfynn at gmx.net>
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: Open Font Library list <openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Message-ID: <4902A814.9060900 at gmx.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>
>
> Ben Weiner wrote:
>
> ...
>
>> which are far and away going to be the most widely appreciated, then
>>
>> .pfa
>> .pfm
>> .pfb
>> .afm
> ...
>
>
> Hmm, shouldn't that be something like: either .pfb or .pfa  along with
> either .pfm  or .afm + .inf as a minimum for non OT postscript fonts?
>
> The font glyph outlines are either in a pfb or a pfa file while the
> metrics, kerning and other info for the font are in the corresponding
> pfm file or afm + inf files. So you need at least two or three files.
>
> .pfa = postscript font ascii  (Type)
> .pfb = postscript font binary (Type 1)
>
> .pfm = printer font metrics
> .afm = adobe font metrics
> .inf = font information file
>
> - Chris
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:43:15 +0100
> From: Ben Weiner <ben at readingtype.org.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: Open Font Library list <openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Message-ID: <49031463.6050303 at readingtype.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi,
>
> Ben Laenen wrote:
>> How is this enforced?
> ccHost (the site platform) will accept or reject files based on their
> extension and, depending on the filetype, will attempt to verify the
> ones it does allow.
>
>> I thought people were uploading zip files
>> containing the fonts and all extra files like README and LICENSE.
>>
> Looks as though in the next OFLB site version we'll have to ask people
> to upload individual files. We'd certainly need to unpack archives  
> if we
> allowed them, and ccHost currently cannot see inside tarballs, facts
> that together mean we're best avoiding them.
>
> That's in direct opposition to Nicolas' suggestion, I'm afraid. And I
> speak as an enthusiast of archive-uploading.
>
> The FONTLOG will be stored as metadata associated with the typeface.
> Also due to the way cccHost stores uploads. README is anything the  
> user
> puts in the description, for now. License is metadata (and can/ 
> should of
> course be stuck into TTF fonts and their friends).
>
> Cheers,
> Ben
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 15:12:52 +0200
> From: Ben Laenen <benlaenen at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org
> Message-ID: <200810251512.52481.benlaenen at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain;  charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> On Saturday 25 October 2008, Ben Weiner wrote:
>> Looks as though in the next OFLB site version we'll have to ask
>> people to upload individual files. We'd certainly need to unpack
>> archives if we allowed them, and ccHost currently cannot see inside
>> tarballs, facts that together mean we're best avoiding them.
>
> I completely disagree with that, and it won't work anyway. You assume
> that fonts are always one file, or everything could be pushed into one
> file. If you look at DejaVu we have a *lot* more, like build files
> (Makefile, some scripts to process the fonts when building etc), more
> scripts that help in development, and other metadata files like
> changelogs, readme, status files etc.
>
> Other projects have for example Xgridfit files for their hinting, or
> other files that are used for building the fonts from source.
>
> If ccHost cannot handle zipped files, then too bad. Not allowing zip
> files to be uploaded would be a major defect of the site.
>
> Greetings
> Ben
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 8
> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 15:33:19 +0100
> From: Ben Weiner <ben at readingtype.org.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: Open Font Library list <openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Message-ID: <49032E2F.90000 at readingtype.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi,
>
> Ben Laenen wrote:
>> On Saturday 25 October 2008, Ben Weiner wrote:
>>
>>> Looks as though in the next OFLB site version we'll have to ask
>>> people to upload individual files. We'd certainly need to unpack
>>> archives if we allowed them, and ccHost currently cannot see inside
>>> tarballs, facts that together mean we're best avoiding them.
>>>
>>
>> I completely disagree with that, and it won't work anyway. You assume
>> that fonts are always one file, or everything could be pushed into  
>> one
>> file.
> Never ;-)
>
> Although that sounds a bit like an archive to me :-)
>> If you look at DejaVu we have a *lot* more, like build files
>> (Makefile, some scripts to process the fonts when building etc), more
>> scripts that help in development, and other metadata files like
>> changelogs, readme, status files etc.
>>
>> Other projects have for example Xgridfit files for their hinting, or
>> other files that are used for building the fonts from source.
>>
> Aha! Source. Nobody's come back to me on that. I know humans can read
> .sfd files. What about the 'source' files used by other font-authoring
> applications? Do we accept these even thought they're not amenable to
> reuse except by people who also own that software?
>
> If we do decide to accept them, can someone provide a 'Hello
> Typographical World' example file for each? I  can do Macromedia
> Fontographer from my deep-stored Mac OS 8 box, but none of the others.
>> If ccHost cannot handle zipped files, then too bad.
> It can certainly handle them. What it doesn't do is make them usefully
> available in their unscrambled form. It's also not very deft with
> tarballs - although it'll accept them by default, you cannot find out
> what's inside them (without a plugin of some sort from the future,  
> AFAIK).
>
> Incidentally, there is no reason why what I'm informally calling the
> 'typeface record' (the basic unit of ccHosting as applied to fonts, eg
> http://openfontlibrary.org/media/files/OSP/322) should not possess a  
> mix
> of compiled fonts and zipped resources such as the source files and
> readmes. Anyone think that's a good idea?
>
> Cheers,
> Ben
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 9
> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 15:37:59 +0100
> From: Ben Weiner <ben at readingtype.org.uk>
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: Open Font Library list <openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Message-ID: <49032F47.7040905 at readingtype.org.uk>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi,
>
> I wrote:
>> Incidentally, there is no reason why what I'm informally calling the
>> 'typeface record' (the basic unit of ccHosting as applied to fonts,  
>> eg
>> http://openfontlibrary.org/media/files/OSP/322)
> Looking at this rather fab typeface, it's clear what a huge chore it
> would be to upload the whole family file by file.
>
> When that plugin from the future is written I will be the first to  
> plug
> it in. Otherwise we'll need a flickr Uploadr style helper app ;-)
>
> Ben
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 10
> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 18:18:52 +0200
> From: Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot at laposte.net>
> Subject: Re: [Openfontlibrary] Font formats accepted by OFLB
> To: Ben Weiner <ben at readingtype.org.uk>
> Cc: Open Font Library list <openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org>
> Message-ID: <1224951532.31574.9.camel at arekh.okg>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Le samedi 25 octobre 2008 ? 15:37 +0100, Ben Weiner a ?crit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I wrote:
>>> Incidentally, there is no reason why what I'm informally calling the
>>> 'typeface record' (the basic unit of ccHosting as applied to  
>>> fonts, eg
>>> http://openfontlibrary.org/media/files/OSP/322)
>> Looking at this rather fab typeface, it's clear what a huge chore it
>> would be to upload the whole family file by file.
>
> Download would be no easier.
>
> Again, one of the big reasons evey distro under the sun bundles DejaVu
> nowadays, is that it used early the well known and proven bin  
> tarball +
> source tarball (with build scripts, documentation, detached font
> license, versioning, etc) distribution form instead of the usual  
> "fonts
> are special" mess that has everyone but font creators scratching their
> heads wondering what they're supposed to make of it.
>
> It's fairly interesting to note, BTW, that despite all the media  
> tapage
> Liberation is still struggling to get the same adoption rate as DejaVu
> http://www.codestyle.org/css/font-family/sampler-UnixResults.shtml
>
> The only big difference between Liberation and early DejaVu (apart  
> from
> the Red Hat marketing run) was the craptastic way Liberation was
> initially published on the web (and it was still better than getting
> files one at a time).
>
> Regards,
>
> -- 
> Nicolas Mailhot
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: not available
> Type: application/pgp-signature
> Size: 197 bytes
> Desc: Ceci est une partie de message
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=
> Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/openfontlibrary/attachments/20081025/80e752cd/attachment.pgp
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Openfontlibrary mailing list
> Openfontlibrary at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/openfontlibrary
>
>
> End of Openfontlibrary Digest, Vol 34, Issue 13
> ***********************************************



More information about the Openfontlibrary mailing list