Comment 91 for bug 521163
Revision history for this message
|
|
#91 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
73416ba
(Get the code!)
(In reply to comment #80)
> On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 5:09 PM, <email address hidden> wrote:
>
> >
> > I intentionnaly didn't touch the proposed CJK stacks, though I feel it is
> > highly abusive to registed the same font in multiple generics.
> >
> >
> In addition, it is NOT to register the same font in multiple generics, it is
> to expand
> the fallback. I agree that in family->generic mapping, it makes sense to map
> to only one generic alias for every font (which I did in 41-*). However, for
>
> generic->family fallback, it is a different story. Even I don't put a font
> name
> there, fontconfig will pick it up. The only difference is at least I have
> control
> the rest of the orders.
IMHO this is broken logic. With that logic you end up putting every font in every generic stack just in case.
You'd be better served by opening a fontconfig bug asking to look into other generic stacks by default before fallbacking to fonts that were not specified explicitely in one of them.