fonts May 2022

fonts@lists.fedoraproject.org

3 participants
4 discussions

[announce] bugzilla Fonts component
by Jens-Ulrik Petersen 31 Jul '22

31 Jul '22

Hello, First I should apologize for not discussing this more widely earlier, but in the i18n subproject we recently suggested and requested that there should be a generic 'Fonts' component in bugzilla for Fedora since we often see various generic fonts bugs which take time to determine and resolve and would easily get lost in the broad 'distribution' component. See https://pagure.io/i18n/issue/124 and https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/9368 for more background. Currently i18n-bugs is the primary assignee and fonts-bugs is in auto-CC. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=__open__&component=Fonts… I think it can be used in two ways - primarily (long term) for distro wide fonts issues that are not bugs of a particular component (eg discussions on changing default fonts, etc) - possibly triaged from some font component, and secondly when users have no idea what component to file fonts issues under, which then would need to be triaged to a particular font package. I don't think we will see a huge number of bugs under this component but it should be useful for tracking longer term issues and problems. If this also helps to encourage Fonts SIG activity that would also be a good thing. Thanks, Jens

3 2

Hey there, I'm new here!
by Elliott Tallis 10 May '22

10 May '22

Hey there, Just wanted to drop this introduction here like it says on the wiki. Just your average UK lurker wanting to poke around at Fedora's internals a bit. I'd also love it if someone could point me in the right direction on how/where/if to suggest packaging for Unicode's Last Resort font, which can be found here: https://github.com/unicode-org/last-resort-font, since I don't have access to add it to the wishlist myself because I'm in no groups, and I'm a bit numbskulled sometimes. Thanks, Elliott Tallis aka pointy

2 1

Font Review Request
by Hedayat Vatankhah 04 May '22

04 May '22

1 0

Sad state of default Persian font in Fedora
by Hedayat Vatankhah 03 May '22

03 May '22

Hi again! Once upon a time, DejaVu font was used for all Persian text rendering in Fedora. While some people considered it to be somewhat ugly, it was consistent. But, it changed a few releases ago where "Droid Kufi" (from google-droid-sans-fonts) started to be used in some places, e.g. in Telegram desktop (from rpmfusion) or IIRC in some other apps like Thunderbird. "Droid Kufi" is not suitable for Persian, it can be considered a fantasy font in Persian not something to be used in normal Sans text. Then, in Fedora 36, with the introduction of Noto fonts by default, things become worse: now, we have still DejaVu fonts being used by default in Gnome, Droid Kufi still is being used but in less places (when Droid Sans or Open Sans are needed), and Noto Sans Arabic is also being used in some places (e.g. Thunderbird & Firefox default font for title bars and menus and....). To make things even worse, from what I see in [1] and [2], it is expected that "PakType Naskh Basic" be used as the default Persian font; which fortunately isn't the case. PakType fonts are absolutely not suitable for Persian normal text, at least for fa_IR locale. Noto Sans Arabic can be an acceptable font for Persian, specially if this bug [3] is fixed. It can be also considered a good font to be used where "Droid Sans" is needed for Persian text; as it seems that Noto fonts are similar to Droid ones. Noto Naskh Arabic could be also a good candidate, and it is very similar or exactly the same as the font used by Android for Persian; but it has two issues: 1. It is considered a Serif font, so I wonder if it is acceptable to be used also where a Sans font is needed 2. It appears somewhat smaller than other fonts, which is somewhat annoying. I wonder why, but comparing to fonts like Noto Sans, Droid Sans and even Droid Naskh, it is smaller. If it was almost as big as the other options, it'd be probably a good candidate to be used by default too. How this consistency issue can be fixed? I'm trying to package Vazirmatn (formerly Vazir) font for Fedora, which seems to be a good candidate to be used by default in Fedora. But, I don't know how to solve the consistency problem. I am able to make it to be used by default by Gnome, and also be used where Open Sans is needed (currently for Telegram Desktop mainly); but I cannot make it to work by default by Firefox/Thunderbird. They are weird, while they show "Default (Vazirmatn)" (or "sans-serif") option; when you select it, it falls back to "Noto Sans Arabic" font, but if I select "Vazirmatn" explicitly, it uses it. I wonder if I should fill a bug against Firefox/Thunderbird. Now: 1. How can we select a font to be used consistently everywhere for Persian? 2. Which option should be "the one"? DejaVu Sans, Noto Sans Arabic (with that annoying bug fixed), Noto Naskh (scaled up), or to be added "Vazirmatn" font? I'm leaned towards Vazirmatn for now considering the current state of all these fonts; but I wonder if one of Noto ones are preferred for distro consistency, but changes are needed for them. [1] https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/noto/f36-noto.html [2] https://tagoh.fedorapeople.org/fonts/status/36.html [3] https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts/issues/2251 [4] https://github.com/rastikerdar/vazirmatn

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

fonts May 2022