From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <e6dc7df1dd6313c3a9b27f23aa556a47@quanstro.net>
From: erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net>
Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2006 20:29:27 -0600
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] ttf2subf
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1be5aa48-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

all this is true, but i don't know of any bitmap fonts with good
unicode coverage.

the freetype library does know how to decode the bitmaps and
hints encoded ttf fonts.

- erik

On Wed Mar 22 20:26:07 CST 2006, rsc@swtch.com wrote:
> generating screen fonts from ttf is basically not a good idea.
> they're going to be ugly at the low resolutions unless they
> were explicitly designed to double as screen fonts.  the only
> examples i know of in that camp are verdana and georgia,
> but i'm not sure that the magic ttf goo that encodes how to
> make them look good at small resolutions is known to libfreetype.
> http://www.will-harris.com/verdana-georgia.htm
>
> you're much better off finding fonts that were designed as
> real bitmap fonts from the start.  any of apple's early bitmap
> fonts would fit this category too, but i'm sure they're not
> available for general use.
>
> all that said, we've got a collection of very nice fonts - the pelm,
> lucm, and lucida bitmaps - i'd stick to those.  if you must, there's
> always the x11 fixed-width fonts (/lib/font/bit/fixed).
>
> russ
>