W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-font@w3.org > January to March 1996

Re: METAFONT - are you kidding?

From: Paul Haeberli <paul@balla.asd.sgi.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 1996 03:08:55 -0800
Message-Id: <199601281108.DAA28626@balla.asd.sgi.com>
To: www-font@w3.org
> "Benjamin C. W. Sittler" <bsittler@mailhost.nmt.edu> wrote:
> What about METAFONT files? While the computational overhead is a bit
> stiff, I don't think your average workstation or PC would have a problem
> with it. It's also (so far as I know) free of troublesome legal problems,
> and already implimented for a variety of machines. It is quite capable of
> handling scalable fonts in a wide range of sizes, and several texts are
> apparently available on the WWW in TeX format. [1]

I definately agree that having a scalable representation is
a good thing, but spline polygon formats are what current 
designers are using to generate typefaces, not METAFONT 
paths and brushes.

I agree that METAFONT fonts can be converted into spline or 
polygonal outlines, but converting spline outline fonts
into the METAFONT model is somewhere between very difficult
and impossible.

If you want a scalable font technology. I suggest spline
outlines.  Since you can't convert nice spline fonts into
METAFONT format, I would not recommend using it as a font
format on the web.

As for legal problems using Type1 or Truetype format.  I 
don't think there are any.  Adobe and Microsoft wouldn't 
mind if you decided to use Type1 ot Truetype.  They would
love it.

paul haeberli
Received on Sunday, 28 January 1996 06:10:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:01:37 UTC