From: Peter Constable (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Dec 03 2004 - 09:56:29 CST
> From: email@example.com [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Of Peter R. Mueller-Roemer
> Sorry! I double-clicked on its icon - whith a
> colored "OT" - in \WINDOWS\Fonts again it says after version 1.xx
> "(Opent Type)". I took that to mean Open Source or something more open
> than MS's restrictive policy about it. I still claim it does not
> deserve the label OPEN at present.
I'm not sure how you got "OpenFont" from "OT".
Fortunately for much of the type industry, there is no prior IP claim on
the English word "open". In this case, as has been mentioned, "OT"
stands for "OpenType", a font format that is used for advanced
typographic capabilities, so named because the specification for the
format is published openly and is available for anyone to use in
development of their own products.
That certainly seems to me to be a reasonable application of the word
> Vice versa MS-fonts can be installed under Linux
If you wish to use fonts that ship with MS products on another platform,
please ensure that you read the EULA of the product with which they were
> SIL-fonts and TITUS have been called legacy or not up to date in our
What about the SIL and TITUS fonts is legacy?
> and I found them disappointing for my purposes: Predictable
> display and print of sequences of base + combining diacritical
> in ordinary e-mails on all systems.
Are you sure that there isn't any fault with some of the platforms or
applications running on them rather than the fonts? E.g. there may be
some bugs in the Doulos SIL font, but on the whole I'd say that if you
don't get predictable display results on some system I'd be questioning
the system before I question the font.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Dec 03 2004 - 10:03:46 CST