I would like to add a little on this topic. On 19/05/07, Matt Zimmerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There has been some confusion and dissatisfaction over the treatment of > fonts in Ubuntu for a some time now, and no common understanding of how to > improve the situation. I spent a little time thinking about this today, and > would like to present some questions whose answers I hope will help us to > make some progress.
Compared to some of the points Matt Zimmerman makes, my comment is a small one. And for computer users sticking strictly to english in all ways it won't matter at all. ( But I do suspect them to be a minority. ) My comment and plea is this: Do not forget that many -probably most- computer users need letters and diacritical symbols in addition to the basic A-Z. Most languages I know about use more than A-Z. And even if someone speaks only english she will need the extra letters and symbols as soon as she writes to someone from another country. In spite of this self-evident need of "complete" fonts, surprisingly many fonts that are otherwise promising prove to be totally useless and uninteresting because they only contain the basic "imperial" set of symbols. This shortsightedness is not only evident in many fonts, it is also demonstrated in the font preview applet. Even when using an all-norwegian installation of Ubuntu the font preview only shows letters A-Z, numbers 0-9 and the sentence about the fox. So to find out if a font is sensible or if it is handicapped I will have to do some extra effort. I feel sure that making a complete and useful font in the first place will be less work all inn all compared to first making a handicapped version of the font and later have someone else fix it to make it useful. To be fair, many fonts are indeed complete and useful already. Regards, Bjørn Ingmar Berg -- Ubuntu-devel-discuss mailing list Ubuntu-devel-discuss@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel-discuss
