[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Font package naming convention
From: |
Andreas Enge |
Subject: |
Re: Font package naming convention |
Date: |
Sun, 2 Nov 2014 18:49:35 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 06:18:19PM +0100, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> Some of the fonts created by foundries are often referred to it using
> the foundry’s name, such as “Bitstream Vera”; there are also
> counter-examples, like Gentium, Charis, etc. (by SIL.)
>
> So, again very informally, I would suggest to use the foundry name in
> cases where people expect to see it, and in cases where it removes
> ambiguity with similarly-named fonts.
>
> What do people think?
I think it would be nice to add the foundry when it is know, such as
sil-gentium etc.; personally I find it an interesting information to have
(we would get a complete list of all packages sil fonts, for instance).
Andreas
- Re: Font package naming convention, Alex Kost, 2014/11/01
- Re: Font package naming convention, Andreas Enge, 2014/11/01
- Re: Font package naming convention, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/11/02
- Re: Font package naming convention,
Andreas Enge <=
- Re: Font package naming convention, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/11/03
- Re: Font package naming convention, Andreas Enge, 2014/11/03
- Re: Font package naming convention, Alex Kost, 2014/11/03
- Re: Font package naming convention, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/11/03
- Re: Font package naming convention, Ludovic Courtès, 2014/11/19
- Re: Font package naming convention, Andreas Enge, 2014/11/19
- Re: Font package naming convention, Alex Kost, 2014/11/20
- [PATCH] gnu: Add 'font-liberation'., Alex Kost, 2014/11/23
- Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add 'font-liberation'., Ludovic Courtès, 2014/11/24