[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT |
Date: |
Wed, 16 Mar 2005 01:01:18 +0100 (CET) |
> > Look at ftview -r 66 15 .../LucidaBrightRegular.ttf
> >
> > The miniscules with a curve at the top have an x-height one pixel
> > larger than those with a line segment, akin to Frederic's pngs.
>
> This is a different problem. Just to be sure that it is really a
> problem of FreeType: Can a Windows user please check the output of
> this font and post a small PNG image which contains the characters
> a-z? `-r 66 15' corresponds to a pixel size of 14.
Whether the x-height is one pixel too large or not depends on the used
dpi value. For example, if I use 96dpi (as with Windows), all sizes
appear just fine. I get the impression that it is not a FreeType
problem but that the font has been optimized for 96dpi (this is, it
contains special bytecode for this particular resolution) but not for
72dpi or other resolutions.
Werner
- [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, Victor Luchits, 2005/03/09
- Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, David Turner, 2005/03/10
- Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, Frederic Crozat, 2005/03/10
- Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, David Turner, 2005/03/10
- Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, James Cloos, 2005/03/10
- Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, Werner LEMBERG, 2005/03/11
- Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT,
Werner LEMBERG <=
- Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, James Cloos, 2005/03/16
- Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, Werner LEMBERG, 2005/03/17
- Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, James Cloos, 2005/03/17
Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, Robert O'Callahan, 2005/03/11
Re: [ft-devel] Two patches for FT, Werner LEMBERG, 2005/03/17