Hi Zdenek, On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 6:57 PM, Zdenek Wagner <zdenek.wag...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2012/1/6 Zdenek Wagner <zdenek.wag...@gmail.com>: >> 2012/1/6 Steve White <stevan.wh...@googlemail.com>: >>> >> I did not know that FreeSans and FreeSerif contain contain Devanagari. >> The fonts were installed with my Linux distribution thus I will try to >> make some tests. >> > > FreeSans looks weli in my computer but FreeSerif is totally broken, > probably all the GPOS tables for Devanagari are missing. However, my > Linux is very old, I will try to find a new version of the fonts > I see it now.
Please submit a bug report, explaining Devanagari in Serif has inadequate look-ups, and compare it to FreeSans. (They would be GSUB tables, by the way.) It's amazing I missed this so long, but I don't have many tests for Devanagari/ There is a single lookup in Serif for that script with a single ligature. I remember wondering about that single glyph, but it had a funny name, and maybe I never researched it. I don't see any other glyphs for ligatures for the range. It looks bad. It may be the lookups were inserted but somehow deleted. I'll check. Otherwise, I may have to delete the Devanagari range from FreeSerif. The story is: almost a decade ago, there was a period of enthusiastic addition to FreeFont, unfortunately with limited guidelines. Several non-functional ranges were included. We have since cleaned up most of these problems, but clearly some remain. The only other possibility is that I find the source for this range, and it includes the ligated glyphs already. Then it is just a matter of a *couple of weeks* of work. Otherwise I'll be forced to delete the range in Serif. > Before reporting I would like to ask one question. In all Devanagari > fonts I have ever seen the long independent A (U+0906) looks > graphicaly as if short independent A (U+0905) was followed by long A > matra (U+093E). In FrreSerif and FreeSans the vertical stems in the > long independent A are too close to each other. When looking to the > text it is not well readable. Is this just my feeling or should I > report it as a bug? > Please report that as a separate bug. If you could provide me an image of text you judge to be better, with the same text encoded in Unicode, that would be great! I can easily fix such an individual problem if the range is otherwise working. Thanks hugely! >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:59 AM, bhutex <bhu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Following Unicode free fonts are available for Hindi/Devnagari : >>>> >>>> Akshar Unicode - not beautiful >>>> Chandas - Full font, not only devnagari but all characters needed for >>>> typesetting vedas etc. >>>> Uttara - Probably a variant of Chandas >>>> Nakula and Sahedava - Twin fonts >>>> FreeSans - it has Devnagari but not fully working for example फ्र etc. are >>>> not coming properly >>>> Osha - >>>> Guruma - >>>> Siddhanta - It has variants like Siddhanta 1, Siddhanta 2, Chakravat, >>>> Chakravat 2 >>>> Calcutta , Calcutta1, Calcutta 2, Vyakaran and Nepali >>>> Sanskrit2003 >>>> AA-NagariShri >>>> >>>> In addition some fonts are available on the Govt. of India's Ministry of >>>> Information Technology website (around 50 fonts (including Bold, Italic, >>>> Bold Italic)) fromC-DAC etc. organizations. But these fonts also have some >>>> problem Just like FreeSans. >>>> >>>> The fonts mentioned above (for dictionary type work) are sufficient. C-DAC >>>> fonts are mostly decorative fonts. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Happy TeXing >>>> The BHU TeX Group >>>> क्या आप यह देख पा रहें हैं। >>>> इस का मतलब आप का कम्प्यूटर यूनीकोड >>>> को समझती है। देर किस बात की हिन्दी मे >>>> चिठ्ठियां लिखिये। >>>> > > > -- > Zdeněk Wagner > http://hroch486.icpf.cas.cz/wagner/ > http://icebearsoft.euweb.cz > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: > http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
