[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ft-devel] Setting FT_ValidationLevel
From: |
Masatake YAMATO |
Subject: |
Re: [ft-devel] Setting FT_ValidationLevel |
Date: |
Wed, 13 Jul 2005 16:31:58 +0900 (JST) |
> > I have found that there is no way to pass FT_VALIDATE_DEFAULT,
> > FT_VALIDATE_TIGHT not FT_VALIDATE_PARANOID to FT_OpenType_Validate.
> >
> > Always FT_VALIDATE_DEFAULT is used. Is it expected behavior?
>
> Yes, more or less. I've modeled the validation code after the cmap
> validation code which also doesn't allow configuration. IIRC, David's
> idea was that a normal build of the FreeType library should use the
> default value since it isn't its job to do a thorough font checking --
> rather the opposite, namely to allow as much glitches in the font as
> possible. People who want to reuse FreeType's validation code will
> change this.
I see.
> Do you need it configurable? Why?
No. However, I have one more question:
freetype/ftotval.h:
#define FT_VALIDATE_BASE 0x0100
#define FT_VALIDATE_GDEF 0x0200
#define FT_VALIDATE_GPOS 0x0400
#define FT_VALIDATE_GSUB 0x0800
#define FT_VALIDATE_JSTF 0x1000
#define FT_VALIDATE_OT FT_VALIDATE_BASE | \
FT_VALIDATE_GDEF | \
FT_VALIDATE_GPOS | \
FT_VALIDATE_GSUB | \
FT_VALIDATE_JSTF
Why FT_VALIDATE_BASE is started from 0x0100?
It seems that 0xFF is reserved.
I guessed this 0xFF is reserved for passing the validation level.
Using this reserved area, it is easy to pass a validation level
to validator; and it is easy to switch the validation level
dynamically.
Masatake YAMATO