- From: Koji Ishii <kojiishi@gluesoft.co.jp>
- Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2011 15:55:28 -0500
- To: John Daggett <jdaggett@mozilla.com>
- CC: Brad Kemper <brad.kemper@gmail.com>, MasaFuji <masa@fuji.email.ne.jp>, www-style list <www-style@w3.org>, Thomas Phinney <tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu>, Ambrose LI <ambrose.li@gmail.com>, "www-font@w3.org" <www-font@w3.org>
> You're generalizing too far here, Morisawa has designed the font for a very specific *print* > workflow, one that clearly involves rasterizer-level support for asymmetric scaling of font > glyphs. You're right, this font is a little special case to talk common scenario. I'm sorry to talk these two together. > This is precisely my original point, asymmetric scaling of glyphs won't yield quality results > for screen rendering unless the font rasterizer is involved. I believe that's possible with > CoreGraphics on OSX or FreeType on Linux but it's certainly not possible with GDI on > Windows XP. > > In this vein, I should point out that it would be far more interesting to support some form > of arbitrary font axes, such as Quickdraw GX variation axes or Adobe Multiple Master fonts. > These formats allow a font designer to design specific parameterizations into the font data, > similar to the way hinting data allows a font designer to add adjustments for display at > specific resolutions. The Skia font that still ships with OSX supports 'weight' and 'width' > axes, allowing a single font to support an arbitrary range of weights and widths. While this > isn't currently widely supported technology and would require a new version of OpenType, > it has a lot of size benefits for web use. > > With such a capability, an arbitrary axis such as 'contrast' > could be supported for a family like Axis Mincho: > > http://www.typeproject.com/demo/axis_mincho.html > > Note how the glyphs vary by weight (vertical axis) and contrast (horizontal axis). Neat, > eh? > > Far better to have something like this that can unleash the creativity of font designers > rather than try and perform imaging acrobatics with fonts simply not designed for a given > effect. Your points taken. I was talking about how often asymmetric scaling are used in printing, but I guess you already know that, and I have to admit that I didn't pay much attention on how on-screen quality differs from printing. The information you gave me is so valuable, thank you. I'll investigate what would be the best way to bring those printing requirements to on-screen world. Not very soon though. Regards, Koji
Received on Wednesday, 19 January 2011 20:54:05 UTC