Dnia Wed, Mar 25, 2009 at 01:52:34PM +0000, Bruce D\\\'Arcus napisał(a):
Marcin Borkowski
writes: Dnia Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 05:14:49PM -0600, Idris Samawi Hamid ادريس سماوي
حامد napisał(a):
On Tue, 24 Mar 2009 09:27:09 -0600, Bruce D'Arcus
wrote: c) that there's no reason at all to make a distinction between free and professional fonts in such a repository
I absolutely agree with Bruce on this point
And I strongly disagree. A repository of that kind would be a great idea, but at least one column in the table (price, or just "free: Y/N") would be very useful - especially for people like me, who cannot afford expensive commercial fonts.
OK, let me rephrase: I mean there's no reason to exclude commercial font tyepscripts from the repository.
Also, I think it would be useful to include availability information in the file (if possible) regardless of the whether it's free or commercial.
That's right.
And note that the distinction is *not* between "free" and "professional", but rather "free" and "commercial". Aren't LM or TeX Gyre professional;)?
You're right that my word choice was wrong. OTOH, I think LM looks like crap ;-)
Well, it's just Computer Modern revamped;).
But your wording is also a little loose; "free" is rather vague, and licensing details matter quite a lot with fonts.
That's true, too; licensing and intellectual property law resemble a jungle...
Bruce
Regards -- Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl) Well, I admit that I quite like the Emacs operating system. The only problem with it is that it lacks a good ASCII editor.