On 08/27/2012 03:01 AM, Akira TAGOH wrote: > On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 1:37 AM, Behdad Esfahbod <behdad@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> Actually I don't agree. I think this fits better into fontconfig: on the >> matching / enumeration side of things, the CFR looks as if it's one font, but >> it in fact expands to multiple fonts. It's very similar to what 'sans', or >> 'arial' mean right now, or even 'Droid Sans'. > > Sure. but only it is. the important part of this specification IMHO > is, it provides a virtual font and has various parameters as a font, > which allows to override something in an real font. given that we do > support CFR in fontconfig, that would means we need to wrap up > FreeType APIs or reimplement similar thing to take effects them in the > worst case because we might not use FT_Face as is. this is why I think > that may be better getting involved with FreeType or needing some > hooks in FreeType to do what you said, which fontconfig is > responsible. I think we need to update both for CFR. I agree. We wouldn't be able to provide unified font metrics for the CFR, but other than that the rest should be easy to provide given our current APIs. >>> Aside from that we may need to add the postscript name in the cache to >>> allow on the lookup since the CFR uses it rather than the family name. >> >> That would be useful for PDF viewers regardless of this. > > Yes, I think we have an RFE for that in bz. so that would be a good > opportunity to support it. Right. behdad _______________________________________________ Fontconfig mailing list Fontconfig@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/fontconfig
