[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Font naming rears its ugly head again
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Font naming rears its ugly head again
- From: Karl Berry <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 31 Aug 1993 15:54:41 -0400
- Cc: email@example.com
- Flags: 000000000000
- In-Reply-To: Alan Jeffrey's message of Mon, 30 Aug 93 21:03 BST <m0oXFS6-000EuvC@csrj.crn.cogs.susx.ac.uk>
- Reply-To: firstname.lastname@example.org
Just by giving each of these parameters a letter, plus three letters for
the font family, I'd already have used ten letters!
Have to combine.
This is a real pain :-(
Tell me about it :-( :-(
I think your naming scheme is pretty impressive
I don't; I think it stinks! I just don't see any way to do better.
hitting the 8+3 MessyDOS wall pretty soon.
Oh, we were splatted against this wall long long ago ...
* the encoding (Cork, text symbol, math symbol, etc.)
* the digit styles (lining/oldstyle and fixed-width/variable-width)
* the letter styles (u&lc, c&sc, all-caps)
* whether the font was generated using the expert font or not
* the shape (roman, italic, oblique, etc.)
These are all combined in to the variant. I think the only thing in the
above that's not covered now is all-caps. Oh, and ``text symbol'',
since there is no such thing in existing fonts (is there?).
* the weight (light, medium, demi-bold, bold, ultra-bold, etc.)
* the width (condensed, semi-condensed, medium, semi-expanded, etc.)
These got their own letters, so they should be fine.