Re: [NTG-context] Off topic: Does a 'free for commercial use' flared-sans font exist in the world?

[Carlos via ntg-context <ntg-context@ntg.nl>]

On Sat, Jun 17, 2023 at 06:53:06PM +0200, Hans Hagen via ntg-context wrote:

> On 6/17/2023 2:06 AM, linguafalsa--- via ntg-context wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2023 at 06:35:49PM +0200, Gerben Wierda via ntg-context wrote:
> > > I know this is off topic, but I suspect this community is actually one of the best places to find an answer.
> > > 
> > 
> > It is the best community. And I tell you what.
> > 
> > What happened is that all TeX engines have neglected fonts from the beginning.
> 
> Really? When tex showed up digital font technology was pretty much in flux.
> And, with metafont being part of the tex ecosystem, one can argue that tex
> was quite innovative too.

Ecosystem. I would be very careful by including an ecosystem there.
Yes. Yes. The TeX ecosystem is obviously part of TeX but is not part
of the ecosystem of fonts either. And what is done on ecosystems
can either benefit or affect ecosystems greatly. And it's a known
trait that humans have been known for having more of a flock group
mentality for no apparent rationally-based reasons than just being
themselves making  these decisions/following instincts or whatever
and not because of a particular ecosystem, or for the benefit of the latter.

And the above does not imply, bear with me here, that metafont was
not innovative, but it can be argued that without TeX there is no
metafont, so no room is left for errors either. So, yes, it must be
innovative. It has to be.

> 
> Potscript and its fonts came aroudn at the same time and were rather closed
> technologies. But as soon possible backend drivers (also part of the tex
> ecosystem) kicked in.
> 
> Then we got virtual fonts which enhanced tex's capabilities.
> 
> > > I really like Optima, and what I really like about it is the 'flared style'.
> > > 
> > > But I would like to move to a flared-sans font that gives me more licensing freedom. I haven't been able to find one after extensive searching. The only one who were reasonably priced (not free) were the URW Classico ones in Adobe Creative Cloud, but those can only be used in Adobe programs like InDesign (and not TeX).
> > > 
> > 
> > Licensing freedom is an oxymoron. There's no freedom in licensing.
> > Only greed.
> > 
> > The only extension engine that at one point had a plan in mind,
> > or most of the bases covered in this regard was Omega.
> 
> One needs morr than plans. Afaik omega was more about input processing and
> th efont part was mostly going beyond 8 bit fonts but i might have missed
> something (omega was never productin ready).


Notwithstanding the intricacies/details of what may have actually
happened with its short lifespan I think it's more than clear the lack
of support behind it. I'm not going to delve into what exactly caused
its demise or if it was simply the after effect of other projects
that contributed to it. It's irrelevant.

But stand by for a second. I look forward to your quick witted answers. But hear me
out

Suppose that on my prior message I was referring indeed to 'mkii' and
not to 'omega' 

And also suppose for a second that the term 'omega' is to be replaced
with 'mkii' on your reply accordingly 

After careful observation the resemblance is quite possibly identical,
isn't it? and it could also inarguably apply to the circumstances as
well. Don't you think?

I mean, it's like comparing oranges with apples, and mkii with mkiv and
mkvi and so forth 

If you were to tell me then, that mkii for instance was not aimed
as an input processing I can almos assure its falsiliability is written
all over, even before the sentence is processed and thought out loud
by you.

Bottom line is that the production-ready part is an obvious byproduct
of its short lifespan, but one cannot be making the claim (false as
would have been seen later, because omega carbon footprint lasted more
on books than on shelves really, not for selling out fast but rather
discontinued quickly) and that its goal was solely within this input
processing spectrum. Because it wasn't.

Or heck

or heck. Let's go even further. By making the dubious assertion
that we've been built with noses to hold our eyeglasses lest these
eyeglasses fall off while reading, or that we've been built with ears
to hold pencils and pens in the ears while thinking and writing.

For crying out loud. 

> 
> It is xetex that hooked into opentype although pdftex can actually deal with
> truetype fonts to some extend. Before there was something 'opentype' we had
> two competing but similar technologies. And it took a while before it was
> even clear how to interpre the specification (also think about reverse
> engeneering fonts and heuristics and ... bugs or features ...). TeX was
> always pretty fast in picking up new stuff (maybe users less so).
> 
> > When it came to commercial fonts the plan of action ahead was by
> > including PFC data on these very same commercial fonts that would
> > benefit primarily its opentype versions in the long run.
> 
> What is PFC data?

The glyph containers on a table-based SFNT format 
> 
> > What do you have right now? Opentype fonts only. Sure. Quality can be
> > even the same than its type1 counterpart, and at times not so much
> > according so some folks that have bothered to go the extra length in
> > making the most accurate comparison that's available between them two.
> 
> For most fonts it's just 'more shapes' which then also leads to more
> ligatures, kerns etc btu that is already nice. And when fonts lack something
> we can always tweak them (runtime).

But it's not about kerns nor ligatures but hinting Hans, hinting, and
that alone right there, underlies the  whole reason by which experts
have been infatuated with digital fonts for ages. 

But I guess what you wrote earlier aligns in more ways than one with
what omega end-goal was, whether unwanted or not, routing along to
an opentype tunnel vision perspective, while shrugging off other
simplistic formats such as afm/tfm by breaking down the glyphs into
smaller pieces Although I would see it differently, and perhaps
I'm wrong. And perhaps it wasn't practical either, but for some
folks it was worth the extra complexities to undertake at the time,
while for many wasn't. Regardless, converters to take you over to
the containers' formats and include the tables later on was likely
needed either way. So why bother, right?

But pfc was the correct method and not others :) and for the right
reasons. 

> 
> > But looking at it from a bright side/perspective, I think we're no
> > longer facing the same pre-historic constraints of including a font
> > as before, as long as it's not for commercial purposes, You are well
> > aware of these non and commercial uses even before  your extensive
> > search anyway,
> 
> I'm not sure what is the difference between commercial fonts and free ones
> as they use the same technology; with some exceptions, fonts are not that
> expensive (take lucida from tug, making fonts takes time after all); and for
> publishers it's noise on their budgets.
> 
> > p.s many many years ago I read and followed some publications about
> > the aformentioned extension and just went over them recently, to
> > have an idea what did and did not work. In regards to typefaces,
> > its goal was unmatched, or so I think.
> 
> It might be comforting to know that right from the start luatex made a lot
> possible wrt fonts (runtime manipulation) and was also one of the first to
> support variable fonts, color fonts etc (not that many care about that). And
> with luametatex we go even further.
> 
> > > I found some flared-sans fonts, but not one with at least regular, italic, bold, and bold-italic.
> > > 
> > > Is there really not a single flared-sans font that is really free (so also for commercial use) to use out there?
> I had to search the net to figure out that flare sans fonts are sans fonts
> with serifs
> 
> For those into fonts:
> 
> https://tug.org/TUGboat/tb44-1/tb136carter-romano.pdf
> 
> I a very nice overview of how it went with digital fonts (and what we
> probably lost in getting where we are now and might loose soon).
> 
> Hans
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
>               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
>        tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
> 
> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
> webpage  : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
> archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
> wiki     : https://contextgarden.net
> ___________________________________________________________________________________
> 

-- 
	THE LESSER-KNOWN PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES #18: FIFTH

FIFTH is a precision mathematical language in which the data types
refer to quantity.  The data types range from CC, OUNCE, SHOT, and
JIGGER to FIFTH (hence the name of the language), LITER, MAGNUM and
BLOTTO.  Commands refer to ingredients such as CHABLIS, CHARDONNAY,
CABERNET, GIN, VERMOUTH, VODKA, SCOTCH, and WHATEVERSAROUND.

The many versions of the FIFTH language reflect the sophistication and
financial status of its users.  Commands in the ELITE dialect include
VSOP and LAFITE, while commands in the GUTTER dialect include HOOTCH
and RIPPLE. The latter is a favorite of frustrated FORTH programmers
who end up using this language.

___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : https://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________