Talk:GNU FreeFont

Computing Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Typography Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Typography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Typography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TypographyWikipedia:WikiProject TypographyTemplate:WikiProject TypographyTypography articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

GPL applied to fonts?

What exactly does it mean for the GPL to be applied to a font? If you embed the font in a PDF file, is that considered a "derivative work" and the entire text of the document must be under the GPL? Or is embedding considered to be "mere aggregation"? 69.17.96.185 16:36, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From [1]:

The situation we were considering was one where a font was embedded in a document (rather than merely referenced). Embedding allows a document to be viewed as the author intended it even on machines that don't have that font installed. So, the document (a copyrighted work) would be derived from the font program (another work). The text of the document, of course, would be unrestricted when distributed without the font.
This isn't an artifact of the GPL; it's just the way fonts work. Proprietary fonts often explicitly forbid embedding. So, if you want to send your document off to a printing service, the printing service needs to buy another copy of the font.

Some fonts, like URW++'s Base 35 use font embedding exception to the GPL, like this (URW Palladio L Roman):

% Copyright (URW)++,Copyright 1999 by (URW)++ Design & Development
% (URW)++,Copyright 1999 by (URW)++ Design & Development
% See the file COPYING (GNU General Public License) for license conditions.
% As a special exception, permission is granted to include this font
% program in a Postscript or PDF file that consists of a document that
% contains text to be displayed or printed using this font, regardless
% of the conditions or license applying to the document itself.

Block Ranges?

Could someone add the range numbers to this list of names? :) --Mkouklis 12:20, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

High-quality

Isn't this subjective or is there some standard definition or authority to estimate font's quality? If so, why isn't there any reference to that information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.128.189.6 (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on GNU FreeFont. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070807172502/http://bharatbhasha.org.in:80/bharatbhasha.htm to http://www.bharatbhasha.org.in/bharatbhasha.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 19:30, 16 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Difference between FreeSerif and Times New Roman?

Did you notice any difference of design between these two fonts? I checked carefully, and they seems 100% indentical in all point. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BienheureuxAnonyme (talk • contribs) 21:59, 13 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There are minor differences in all letters. Use a vector graphics editor, write the alphabet, a different color each font, and then overlay them transparently by some alpha blending method. With OpenType there is more to consider, but for a basic comparison it suffices. Nimbus Roman No. 9 L is much closer to Times New Roman, but also seems to have a slighly different horizontal spacing even in ABCD and abcd, which could also be the result of a new kerning configuration. --Rumil (talk) 09:15, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]