For details please see http://bugzilla.novell.com/show_bug.cgi?id=118727 This patch makes two small changes to the rule for artificial emboldening in /etc/fonts/fonts.conf: 1) don't check for "weight >= 200" but for "weight > 100", i.e. instead of <!-- check to see if the pattern requests bold --> <test target="pattern" name="weight" compare="more_eq"> <int>200</int> </test> use <!-- check to see if the pattern requests bold --> <test target="pattern" name="weight" compare="more"> <int>100</int> </test> This is necessary to make <strong>foo</strong> appear bold in firefox. When checking "weight >= 200", emboldening will work for <span style="font-weight:bold;">foo</span> in firefox but not for <strong>foo</strong> (To make it a better readable I used "<const>medium</const>" instead of "<int>100</int>". This makes no functional difference it only enhances the readability). 2) in addition to setting "embolden" to "true", also set "weight" to "bold", i.e. add: <!-- set weight to bold needed for applications using Xft directly, e.g. Firefox, ... --> <edit name="weight" mode="assign"> <const>bold</const> </edit> to the rule. This is necessary to make artificial emboldening work in applications who do no (yet) use cairo but use Xft directly[1] Footnotes: [1] to make this work Xft needs to have the patch for embedded bitmap support and artificial emboldening applied which I attach here as well for reference. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: fonts.conf-embolden.patch Type: text/x-patch Size: 1091 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/attachments/20050929/295e4712/fonts.conf-embolden.bin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: p_xft_cjk.diff Type: text/x-patch Size: 7382 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/fontconfig/attachments/20050929/295e4712/p_xft_cjk.bin -------------- next part -------------- -- Mike FABIAN <mfabian@xxxxxxx> http://www.suse.de/~mfabian ?????????????
