[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: KWord and bitmap fonts
From:       David Faure <david () mandrakesoft ! com>
Date:       2002-07-25 10:49:58
[Download RAW message or body]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Monday 22 July 2002 01:54, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> On Montag, 22. Juli 2002 00:19, Thomas Zander wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On Sunday 21 July 2002 23:22, Nicolas Goutte wrote:
> > > I would really like to know why we cannot support bitmap fonts in KWord.
> > >
> > > When at the end of 2001, I reported display problems with bitmap fonts, I
> > > was told it was because they were bitmap fonts. However in the meantime
> > > all these bugs were fixed.
> >
> > Ehh, we disallowed bitmapped fonts then, that is why they are fixed.
> 
> No, David really fixed all of the problems and not by putting a cloak on them!
> 
> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-cvs&m=101404277810925&w=2

Well, that cvs log was a bit optimistic. I didn't solve all the problems coming from
bitmap fonts - in particular, the idea of "using the metrics from the 100%-zoom size"
only works well if you're at a 100% zoom. At any other zoom level, you end up with
many problems - including, for some fonts, NO zooming at all - I have seen fonts
that keep the same pixel size at all zoom levels, which, well, really sucks.

The real long term solution for this is being worked on - Keith suggested that we
"cheat" on the DPI value, passing a DPI value to libXft that is calculated so that
it "includes the desired zoom level". This needs a Qt API change though, so it can't
be done right now.

Once this is done, I suppose bitmap fonts will be rendered ok again, _on screen_.
Printing is another matter, but maybe a font substitution at print time is acceptable,
in which case we can keep bitmap fonts in the GUI.

I consider the current solution temporary (see DPI stuff above), so any more 
discussion/work on it is IMHO useless. But the question that remains is:
is the current system working good enough to make a stable 1.2 release from it?

- -- 
David FAURE, david@mandrakesoft.com, faure@kde.org
http://people.mandrakesoft.com/~david/
Contributing to: http://www.konqueror.org/, http://www.koffice.org/
Back from holidays - 1750 mails
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE9P9fW72KcVAmwbhARAv2qAJ9DKfxhb6rDv5g4oYxQSuInaYHNbgCgqHuY
6fcZmqxS/ffEL5gwQ8nvlyA=
=RfsI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@mail.kde.org
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]