- From: Gustavo Ferreira <gustavo.ferreira@hipertipo.net>
- Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2009 14:51:47 +0200
- To: "karsten luecke" <list@kltf.de>
- Cc: www-font@w3.org
- Message-Id: <37611050-EC03-4A66-A220-16C8822685A1@hipertipo.net>
On Jul 29, 2009, at 1:05 PM, karsten luecke wrote: > Hello Gustavo, > >>>> I believe the divide will be between "screen text fonts" and >>>> "other fonts", or "size specific fonts" and "scalable fonts" >>>> – not TTF vs CFF. >>> >>> On what basis do you believe this? >> >> On the basis of my own experiments, and on the basis of ideas/ >> protypes shown by David Berlow: >> >> http://www.rogerblack.com/blog/screen_fonts_history >> (http://typophile.com/node/60281) >> http://www.fontbureau.com/test/franky/ > > As clever as I think this approach is, I disagree with the > philosophy on which it is based. The merit of outline fonts is that > they are, at least in principle, ignorant of output devices, their > underlying technologies and resolutions. The approach you refer to > however centers around technology and resolution. > > There are two types of "specific-ness" that should not be mixed up: > 1. SIZE-SPECIFIC design in the sense that it addresses different > type sizes (measured in pt, mm, etc) is a good thing. The "one > outline for all sizes" approach that outline fonts brought with them > results in a compromise, the design needs to serve both very small > and very large sizes. > 2. Size-specific design in the Berlow-sense is not size-specific but > PPEM-SPECIFIC design. This addresses not visual but very specific > technical circumstances. > > For this reason I cannot fully agree with: > >> Size-specific fonts are rasterizer- and technology-independent >> because they use outlines which are grid-fitted by design. If >> used in the correct PPEM size they 'just work' -- the proportions >> match the pixel grid and produce predictable bitmap letter shapes. > > This is correct -- but once real-world screen resolutions go up > considerably, your typeface for which you served text to headline > size fonts, suddenly is useful only for micro sizes. > Or put differently: If you make fonts for specific hardware devices, > offering such ppem-specific designs is a good idea (and why not spec > a ppem-flag in such ppem-specific fonts and ask rasterizers to > respect this?), but less so if you make general-purpose fonts that > may not even be rasterized at all (think of plotters). > >> I guess the OpenType 'size' feature is the right place to adress >> this issue. > > Having made the 1. size-specific vs 2. ppem-specific distinction, I > think that the size feature is NOT the appropriate place. > There should be a ppem-flag for this. Thanks Karsten, I think I agree with everything you wrote. Where can we put such a ppem-flag? :-)
Received on Wednesday, 29 July 2009 12:52:24 UTC