- From: Martin J Duerst <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch>
- Date: Fri, 23 Aug 1996 10:53:46 +0200 (MET DST)
- To: young@cs.purdue.edu (Michal Young)
- Cc: i-simond@microsoft.com, www-font@w3.org
Michal Young wrote: >Users won't tolerate bitmap >fonts (you can make them fast enough, or good enough, but not both), they >won't tolerate schemes with indirection to a vendor font server (for both >performance and convenience reasons), they won't tolerate font substitution >(or so the experience with pdf suggests). Why shouldn't bitmap fonts be fast enough? With a little bit of ingenuity, you can cache fonts in regularly requested sizes at the server (in the way TeX/Metafont do it, namely that a font at a given resolution is calculated when needed, but then not thrown away), at the client site, and maybe on the way between them (e.g. Newzealand uses a countrywide cache). For most sizes, you don't have to differentiate between 72dpi and 75dpi. Regards, Martin.
Received on Friday, 23 August 1996 04:54:22 UTC