<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Bundle and use open source Hebrew fonts by default" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=113538#c21">Comment # 21</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Bundle and use open source Hebrew fonts by default" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=113538">bug 113538</a> from <a class="email" href="mailto:philipz85@hotmail.com" title="Yousuf Philips (jay) <philipz85@hotmail.com>"> Yousuf Philips (jay)</a> <pre>(In reply to Eyal Rozenberg from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=113538#c19">comment #19</a>) > You're "begging the question" (petitio principii) - assuming that's it may > be different in Hebrew than it is in Latin. Why? Didnt follow. > Actually, choosing a nice font for headings may be different than choosing > one for running text. The bundling choices focus on the former. Many of them > - both serif and sans serif - are totally out of the question IMHO as > heading fonts (Miriam, Frank Ruehl). On the other hand, some work both in > both capacities - even against each other, e.g. Alef/Alef or David/David > (when you play with the sizes). I'm assuming we'll be going with a David/David combination based on what you stated in <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=113538#c4">comment 4</a>, but it would be good for the hebrew team to come to a final decision on it. > That's true. A secondary question, though, if the order can include both > serif and sans serif fonts (e.g. "Try Miriam CLM if David CLM is > unavailable"). Yes the order can include both sans and serif if required. This is the order that i've put into my patch.[1] Serif: David Libre; David CLM; Liberation Serif; David; Raanana; Sans: Nachlieli CLM; Liberation Sans; Arial; Arial Hebrew; > I definitely prefer David CLM to David Libre. While some may say I've been > "pre-conditioned" by using MS David for years, I still find David Libre way > off with respect to spacing. It feel a bit like monospace with actually > being monospaced. I tested the character widths and spacing in MS David vs David CLM and MS David is quite cramped comparatively, while David CLM and David Libre have close to identical character widths and spacing. If you are referring to the line spacing, than David Libre is closer in line spacing than David CLM to MS David (see <a href="http://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=137856" name="attach_137856" title="MS vs Libre vs CLM and Web Fonts and David vs Alef">attachment 137856</a> <a href="http://bugs.documentfoundation.org/attachment.cgi?id=137856&action=edit" title="MS vs Libre vs CLM and Web Fonts and David vs Alef">[details]</a>). If you were using to MS David in MS Office, you have to remember that MS Word has 1.15 line spacing in Word 2007/2010 and 1.08 line spacing in Word 2013+, while LO has single line spacing, so line spacing shouldn't really be a deciding factor of what David-variant should be used. > About headings - like I said above, I haven't actually given my preference > for headings. And I think it would also depend on what's the running text > font. I often use David/David myself (and perhaps one could play with the > weights a bit). Another combination I like, which we can't use, is Narkisim > with David - where either one works (in my perception) as a header font for > the other as body font. Narkisim is here: > <a href="https://www.microsoft.com/typography/fonts/family.aspx?FID=252">https://www.microsoft.com/typography/fonts/family.aspx?FID=252</a> About playing with the weights, David CLM only has Medium and Bold, while David Libre has Regular, Medium, and Bold, so we dont have much to work with for David. > I'm not sure what I think about combining David with Alef, though. Alef is > kind of kind of a "look how clever and innovative I am" kind of a font, and > David is more conservative looking (conservative in the 20th century sense, > not older-Jewish-tradition sense). Assume you mean the Alef would be the heading font, which isnt really out of place as we do use a sans font for headings presently - Nachlieli CLM. > Not really. I kind of take that back, and it wasn't a strong preference > anyway. Nachlieli is just fine. Liberation Sans too (in Hebrew, it reminds > me of MS Arial actually - possibly not a bad thing). Rubik feels a bit weird > as a default but I could live with it. So is your order preference of sans is Nachlieli, Liberation Sans, Rubik? > Well, it seems they're not too sure about this either then :-) Well you cant just stay still, you have to innovate over time based on trends and user feedback. :D [1] <a href="https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/45065/">https://gerrit.libreoffice.org/#/c/45065/</a></pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>