On 2/17/06, Eddy Petrişor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/16/06, Eddy Petrişor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 2/13/06, Davide Viti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi Eddy,
> > >
> > > I just noticed this on the wiki [1] ("Arabic scripts"):
> > >
> > > "Apparently both nazli and ae_AlMohanad are ok for Arabic, but nazli is
> > > "definitely not the font to use""
> > >
> > > why do you say "nazli is "definitely not the font to use"" ?
> > > I've never seen a discussion with such a statement: can you eventually
> > > provide a link?
> >
> > I quoted somebody on the IRC channel... will provide the log tomorrow.
>
> Sorry, I haven't saved the log, apparently :-( . I have asked bubulle
> and adn if they might have the logs from #arabeyes on the night of
> 21st to 22nd, but I don't have an aswer yet.
adn was kind enough to provide the logs:
06:12 < eddyp> sbahra: can you take a look at
http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/gtk-frontend/font-snapshots/ttf-nazli-060121/arabic/
? they probably are broken for arabic (using nazli)
06:12 <@sbahra> they are fine
06:13 <@sbahra> but definitely not the font to use
06:13 <@sbahra> They're kind of obscure
06:17 < eddyp> probably because they are the bold ones, maybe?
06:19 <@sbahra> ye
06:20 < eddyp> ok
06:20 < eddyp> thanks for the help
06:20 < eddyp> sbahra: but if we decide to use nazli for arabic, too,
is that ok? (not the bold ones)
06:21 < eddyp> so we can have only one font, both for persian and arabic?!
06:25 <@sbahra> Yes
06:25 <@sbahra> If larger a bit
I guess is clear that the statment was done related to broken
screenshots. I guess we can forget that now.
--
Regards,
EddyP
=============================================
"Imagination is more important than knowledge" A.Einstein
