2014-01-28 Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
Hoi,
Just a question, the WMF has invested a lot of effort in producing fonts
for many of the languages it supports. These fonts are better than the
fonts used in packages like Ubuntu.
Not exactly.
WMF didn't really produce fonts. WMF packaged fonts for the Webfonts and
later ULS extensions. Some were created by carving glyphs from existing
fonts, such as Autonym and the font for Divehi, but that's about it.
Is there a problem in using the WMF supported font ?
It certainly makes
the
inconsistency in Ubuntu moot.
There's no problem in principle, but the packaging process is different.
Webfonts are installed as part of a MediaWiki extension and the fonts for
the PDF renderer are installed as packages on the server. The packaging
mechanism is very different. It's a matter of configuration, a lot of
configuration.
--
Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי
http://aharoni.wordpress.com
“We're living in pieces,
I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore