<html> <head> <base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/"> </head> <body> <div> <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - A new default set of bundled fonts" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103080#c33">Comment # 33</a> on <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - A new default set of bundled fonts" href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=103080">bug 103080</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 Yannick.D from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=103080#c31">comment #31</a>) > Still seems a bit half hearted to me. But obviously priorities are a bit > different here (see <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Handling of fonts with more that 4 styles (R/B/I/BI) is suboptimal" href="show_bug.cgi?id=35538">bug 35538</a>, <a class="bz_bug_link bz_status_NEW " title="NEW - Missing font weights (like Medium)" href="show_bug.cgi?id=98596">bug 98596</a>): Source family - despite sorely > missing the still wip italics – is even now much more complete in terms of > OpenType features, font weights, coverage, thought and polish than many of > the other fonts. I rather see it has most "future potential" as a third > family (DejaVu – legacy, Noto - universal language/unicode support, Source – > modern). If others are of the same opinion that the Source family is worth keeping around as it is modern and has a good future potential for LO, i'm fine with keeping it around. So then the removal would be limited to just Open Sans and PT Serif. Adolfo, Stuart, Tomaz: what is your take?</pre> </div> <hr> You are receiving this mail because: <ul> <li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li> </ul> </body> </html>