Improving i18n test cases
Hi All, I was thinking on i18n test day going to happen on 19th March 2015. Presently we have page [1] with available test cases. I have some suggestions for improvement. 1. Splitting test cases into Generic (everyone), America, APAC and EMEA region. Each test case does not make sense to everyone. Like testing Indic keyboard by other region users or testing CJK IME by other region users. Secondly it will reduce the number of test cases for each person knowledgable about particular language. 2. If any particular setup is just about 3-4 lines, rather than providing link to it, provide contents on same page. Yeah its duplication but will help users to get all required points on single test page. Please note only if configuration requires only 3-4 line setup. Regards, Pravin Satpute 1. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/I18N/TestdayApp/F22 -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: [Test-Announce] 2015-03-19 Fedora 22 I18N Test Day
On 19 March 2015 at 08:57, Akira TAGOH wrote: > Hi, > > We have a test day event for Internationalization on f22 as usual to make > sure if f22 has any issues around i18n. > Please join Freenode #fedora-test-day and try if your primary language > works on f22 when you have a bit of time. > Test cases and details are: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Test_Day:2015-03-19_i18n > > Also good to read: > > http://fedoramagazine.org/your-chance-to-contribute-in-fedora-22-development-cycle-through-test-days/ > > All of feedbacks are valuable. even if you don't have a time today, you > can try it anytime if you like. > We got nice badge from design team for same. :) [1] Will award it next week to all testers provided feedback At results page. [2] Thanks, Pravin Satpute 1. https://badges.fedoraproject.org/badge/i18n-test-day-participant 2. http://209.132.184.193/testdays/show_event?event_id=23 -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Test Day report: 2016-04-12 i18n Test Day
On 21 April 2016 at 04:03, Adam Williamson wrote: > Hey folks! Just some quick news on the i18n Test Day from last week. We > had a great response - big thanks to everyone who came out and helped > test! The IRC channel was busy, and the i18n team did a great job of > helping people out. Here are the statistics: > > Testers: 12, Tests: 66, Bugs: 3, Ratio: 0.25 > Open: 2, Dupe: 1, Fixed: 0, Unfixed: 0, Fixed %: 0.0 > > It's not unusual for the bugs not to be fixed yet, of course, but 12 > testers running 66 tests is great! Thanks everyone :) > Thanks Adam for compiling report. We have now 2 out of 3 bugs fixed :) Will close i18n trac ticket now. Regrdas, Pravin -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/test@lists.fedoraproject.org
Liberation 2.0 Vs Liberation 1.0 (Need comments)
Hi All, As you know Liberation 2.0 is one of the feature of Fedora 18. Recent analysis and comparison with Liberation 1 it is more clear that final output of Liberation 2.0 is not as sharp as it was with Liberation 1.0. Though both are from same vendor (Ascender Corporation) hinting bytecodes are different. Liberation2 already available in Fedora18 Beta, if one wants to install both fonts simultaneously Download [1] has liberation ttf with different family name, so one can have both version same time on Fedora. (cp to /usr/share/fonts/liberation and then fc-cache) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856239 , though bugzilla has more than 100 comments but if someone see to the attached screenshot will be sufficient for review. I did comparison of Fedora output with Windows7 as well. But on Windows results are totally different than Fedora. On Fedora 18 : http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/liberation/arial-sans2-sans1-arimo-testing2-fedora18.png (Here Sans2 = Liberation2 , San1 = Liberation1 and Arimo = Google Croscore) On Windows7 : http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/liberation/arial-sans2-sans1-arimo-testing2-windows7.png On Fedora 18 : http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/liberation/arial-sans2-sans1-arimo-testing2-fedora18-subpixel-rendering.png(with freetype-freeworld Xft.antialias: 1 Xft.dpi: 96 Xft.hinting: 1 *Xft.hintstyle: hintslight* Xft.lcdfilter: lcddefault *Xft.rgba: rgb*) In last 4 comments Mike Fabian has given even more better screenshot showing hinting bytecode which actually affects final output. http://pravin-s.blogspot.in/2012/12/liberation-20-and-liberatoin-10.htmlhas some more images Problem is subjectivity of hinting output, each users has different opinion. So just thinking whether we should defer this feature and once Liberation2 output matches with Liberation1 then only we can go with this feature. Thanks & Regards, Pravin Satpute 1. http://pravins.fedorapeople.org/liberation-fonts-ttf-1-07-2.tar.gz Note: Cross posting to fonts@ , i18n@ and tests@ list for more feedback -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Liberation 2.0 Vs Liberation 1.0 (Need comments)
On 3 December 2012 21:08, Nicolas Mailhot wrote: > > Le Lun 3 décembre 2012 15:26, pravin@gmail.com a écrit : > > Hi All, > > > > As you know Liberation 2.0 is one of the feature of Fedora 18. Recent > > analysis and comparison with Liberation 1 it is more clear that final > > output of Liberation 2.0 is not as sharp as it was with Liberation 1.0. > > Though both are from same vendor (Ascender Corporation) hinting bytecodes > > are different. > > As you wrote results are subjective and I can't stand myself windows-like > font butchering (subpixel hinting, gross glyph distortion). IMHO some > people are fighting a losing battle in trying to perpetuate bitmap font > rendering. > Yeah, even me feel same now. It looks contradictory to achieve bitmap fonts rendeirng with outline fonts. It this case better to use bitmap fonts and lower point size like till 16 where bitmap fonts can give excellent sharp output. > > Every new font is going the Liberation 2 way so I'm not sure at all > investing in old-style hinting is useful at all. I've seen the very same > horror cries when Luxy was dumped, and history showed they were a very > small minority. > Agree. Since Croscore is also from same vendor Ascender, outline is same in fonts. Still the bytecode is different. I still not understood the reason behind the change in bytecode data. > > It may be best to keep a Liberation1 package somewhere and have old-style > hinting fans maintain it. But I doubt they'll be able to keep up with > Unicode changes. And anyway with hi-dpi screens hitting Apple customers > nows, and Android tablet producers following suit, Liberation1-style > hinting is going to be irrelevant in a few years. Resources would be > better expanded in getting our GUI stack to work with hi-dpi before such > hardware becomes common IMHO. > Yeah, this might be reason behind changes in bytecode. Dunno do we need to wait for future in that case. Regards, Pravin Satpute -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Liberation 2.0 Vs Liberation 1.0 (Need comments)
On 3 December 2012 22:26, Kamil Paral wrote: > > Hi All, > > > As you know Liberation 2.0 is one of the feature of Fedora 18. Recent > > analysis and comparison with Liberation 1 it is more clear that > > final output of Liberation 2.0 is not as sharp as it was with > > Liberation 1.0. Though both are from same vendor (Ascender > > Corporation) hinting bytecodes are different. > > > Liberation2 already available in Fedora18 Beta, if one wants to > > install both fonts simultaneously Download [1] has liberation ttf > > with different family name, so one can have both version same time > > on Fedora. (cp to /usr/share/fonts/liberation and then fc-cache) > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856239 , though bugzilla > > has more than 100 comments but if someone see to the attached > > screenshot will be sufficient for review. > > I have replied in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=856239#c125 > > I was very unpleasantly surprised by Fedora 18, because some sites are > blurry as hell. I think people should not respond to this thread unless > they see it on their own eyes first (and try to read some long article with > that font). It makes my eyes bleed. Fedora 17 rendering was definitely > better and crisper. > Yes, that is clear from screenshots. > If you do keep the current blurry fonts as default (god forbid), please at > least provide an easy way to switch to Fedora 17 rendering style. Thanks. > We all thought we need to wait for some more times for this feature. Decided in Fedora i18 meeting to defer this feature now. I will build liberation 1.07.2 soon for Fedora 18. It will solve the issue. Backward compatibility is difficult in this case. But next time i will give better try. Regards, Pravin Satpute -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Liberation 2.0 Vs Liberation 1.0 (Need comments)
On 6 December 2012 17:52, Kamil Paral wrote: > > > If you do keep the current blurry fonts as default (god forbid), > > > please at least provide an easy way to switch to Fedora 17 > > > rendering > > > style. Thanks. > > > > > We all thought we need to wait for some more times for this feature. > > Decided in Fedora i18 meeting to defer this feature now. I will > > build liberation 1.07.2 soon for Fedora 18. It will solve the issue. > > Backward compatibility is difficult in this case. But next time i > > will give better try. > > Pravin, what exactly this means - will F18 repo contain both liberation 1 > and liberation 2 fonts? That means liberation 2 will automatically replace > liberation 1 fonts on update, unless I use some yum extension to force the > old version? Or is the solution different, like renaming liberation 2 fonts > to liberation2 package? > No worries. Simply yum update will revert this change. :) Building liberation 1.07.2-11 with epoch for F18 Regards, Pravin Satpute -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
Re: Liberation 2.0 Vs Liberation 1.0 (Need comments)
On 7 December 2012 18:00, Kamil Paral wrote: > > No worries. Simply yum update will revert this change. :) > > Building liberation 1.07.2-11 with epoch for F18 > > Perfect, thanks Pravin. It's good to switch to a new technology, but just > when it is really ready, not sooner. I'm very glad about the decision that > was made. > This is not matter of readiness of technology. Liberation 2.0 is definitely ready. If you see the coverage of Liberation 2.0 it is 4 times to Liberation 1. - *Latest Version - Older Version* - 2302 (sans) - 667 - 2274 (mono) - 666 - 2303 (serif) - 662 1. We have reverted this only because problem of *backward compatibility*with hinting output. It is sad actually for hinting results of 600 characters, we are not able to provides Fedora users 1800 additional characters. 2. Main goal of Liberation fonts is to providing compatibility fonts for Windows fonts Arial, Times New Roam and Courier. Presently coverage of these Windows fonts is huge. So just think if documents cover other characters than existing coverage of Liberation, and someone open same document in Fedora, will user get his intended layout? are we still achieving our main goal of providing compatibility fonts to users? problem is something different and we need to think on that. I will see if i can do something for Fedora 19. Regards, Pravin Satpute -- test mailing list test@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
