From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: From: C H Forsyth To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] bitstream vera In-Reply-To: <20031026140547.GA5550@ionkov.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="upas-thnpqnbvbdpfvkkxdgmkkcxwkt" Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 15:57:02 +0000 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 79341e0a-eacc-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --upas-thnpqnbvbdpfvkkxdgmkkcxwkt Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit is that canonical? any references? i'd like to know that's really what is supposed to be implemented, without having to go off to investigate, since i've got a lot on at the moment. --upas-thnpqnbvbdpfvkkxdgmkkcxwkt Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Return-path: <9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu> Received: from punt-3.mail.demon.net by mailstore for forsyth@vitanuova.com id 1ADlYe-0001kb-BM; Sun, 26 Oct 2003 15:48:46 +0000 Received: from [130.203.4.6] (helo=mail.cse.psu.edu) by punt-3.mail.demon.net with esmtp id 1ADlYe-0001kb-BM; Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:07:52 +0000 Received: by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server, from userid 60001) id 095FA19B35; Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:07:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from psuvax1.cse.psu.edu (psuvax1.cse.psu.edu [130.203.16.6]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id E8ACF19B86; Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:07:24 -0500 (EST) X-Original-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Delivered-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Received: by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server, from userid 60001) id 5C9D519B1A; Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:06:03 -0500 (EST) Received: from sccrmhc11.comcast.net (sccrmhc11.comcast.net [204.127.202.55]) by mail.cse.psu.edu (CSE Mail Server) with ESMTP id AB4D419B61 for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:05:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from moria.ionkov.net ([68.38.115.196]) by comcast.net (sccrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2003102614055101100c4qc7e>; Sun, 26 Oct 2003 14:05:51 +0000 Received: by moria.ionkov.net (Postfix, from userid 500) id 189C4B3220; Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:05:47 -0500 (EST) From: Latchesar Ionkov To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] bitstream vera Message-ID: <20031026140547.GA5550@ionkov.net> References: <20031025035723.6014.qmail@g.bio.cse.psu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu Errors-To: 9fans-admin@cse.psu.edu X-BeenThere: 9fans@cse.psu.edu X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu List-Id: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans.cse.psu.edu> List-Archive: Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2003 09:05:47 -0500 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-4.5 required=5.0 tests=IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,REPLY_WITH_QUOTES, USER_AGENT_MUTT version=2.55 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.55 (1.174.2.19-2003-05-19-exp) Speaking about multibit fonts ... I was trying to add suport for subpixel fonts. I think the easier way to implement that is to make memimagedraw to apply the channels of the "mask" image (if it is not monocrhome) to the appropriate channels of the "src" image. Currently it generates a greyscale image and applies it to every channel. Is that change going to break anything? Is it a good idea at all? Thanks, Lucho On Sat, Oct 25, 2003 at 07:35:21PM -0400, Russ Cox said: > > I've converted Bitstream Vera to Plan 9 format: > > http://www.cse.psu.edu/~schwartz/vera.tar.bz2 > > > > I'm not sure what dpi ttf2subf is using, but I selected a handful of > > point sizes, hopefully good ones. > > That's a nice font. Does it look good in 1-bit depth? > (I find the multibit fonts too fuzzy for every-day use. > I think my eyes keep trying to focus better.) > > Russ --upas-thnpqnbvbdpfvkkxdgmkkcxwkt--