Fwd: Re: Ghostscript 9.15

[Urs Liska]

Sorry, this had accidentally gone private ...


-------- Weitergeleitete Nachricht --------
Betreff:        Re: Ghostscript 9.15
Datum:  Wed, 25 Mar 2015 09:31:49 +0100
Von:    David Kastrup <address@hidden>
An:     Urs Liska <address@hidden>



Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:

> Am 25.03.2015 um 08:51 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > Urs Liska <address@hidden> writes:
> >
> > > Am 25.03.2015 um 07:50 schrieb David Kastrup:
> > > > > So that’s probably a matter of the font, not of its style - not every
> > > > > > font defines ligatures, and the name „TakaoPGothic“ tells me its main
> > > > > > focus would be Japanese (is this true?), so the designers probably
> > > > > > didn’t put so much work in features of Latin script.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Would you care to try a different font?
> > > > Well, why would the sans-serif font be TakaoPGothic in the first place?
> > > > I think we should be using the same default fonts on every installation.
> > > We don't use any particular font for sans-serif and
> > > monospace. LilyPond simply calls the OS's default here.
> > > Which is something I'd like to raise (once more?): Would it be an
> > > option to find suitable complementing fonts here, ship them with
> > > LilyPond and make them the default?
> > As first measure we should just use one of the 11 or so standard
> > PostScript fonts.  Probably Helvetica and Courier for sans serif and
> > monospace, respectively.
>
> I don't think Helvetica is visually much better, but I agree that it
> would be an improvement.

It is not a matter of "better" but of reproducible scores.

> As it is now compiling scores using sans-serif or monospace (without
> explicit font selection) can come out quite differently on different
> users' computers.

Which is bad.

--
David Kastrup