[prev] [thread] [next] [lurker] [Date index for 2003/09/29]
> Well, X is broken. In many ways. > X likes to deal with strict bitmap fonts. None of > that scalable, TrueType, stuff. No, that's too newfangled for X. One of the deep design assumptions in X: servers have to render windows bitmap-precise. This makes a lot of things break. > My needs are simple. I want TrueType fonts in Mozilla. Mozilla says it > supports TrueType fonts. Surely that means it's brave and daring and uses > the new Xft extension, right? No, of course not. The wise Mozilla > developers decided that it would be better to build TrueType support > *right into Mozilla*, so you have to go out of your way and make sure > Mozilla knows where your TrueType fonts are. It can't figure this out on > its own; it has to be told. Mozilla is also broken in many ways. One of which is its insistence that it do its own rendering down to the bitmap level. I'm sure this is more of the same. > Why can't there be one solution that works well and everyone uses so end > users don't have to worry about stuff like this. Font support should be > something that just works. Yeah, it's probably more likely that everyone > will magically decide to standardize on a single widget toolkit. They used to. All the old stuff used Athena, which meant you could install Xaw3d or Xaw95 and theme the whole system (which is, Mozilla people take note, where themes SHOULD be). But that was before OSF and UI decided to have a fight over whether Motif (the world's ugliest 3d-look) or OpenLook (which until Apple came up with metal was the world champion in wasting screen space on incomprehensible widgets) could piss the furthest.
Generated at 14:02 on 01 Jul 2004 by mariachi 0.52