Debating OpenType 2.0 [LWN.net]

Debating OpenType 2.0

Posted Nov 12, 2015 19:36 UTC (Thu) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523)
In reply to: Debating OpenType 2.0 by rsalvaterra
Parent article: Debating OpenType 2.0

Yes, bitmap fonts are important for languages using Han characters.

Debating OpenType 2.0

Posted Nov 13, 2015 8:54 UTC (Fri) by gioele (subscriber, #61675) [Link] (2 responses)

> Yes, bitmap fonts are important for languages using Han characters.

How come?

Debating OpenType 2.0

Posted Nov 13, 2015 9:03 UTC (Fri) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link] (1 responses)

Vector fonts just look too ugly on regular-resolution screens for small sizes for complicated characters (like "體" for example - try to paste it into a terminal).

If you have a high-DPI display then you can dispense with bitmap fonts, yes.

Debating OpenType 2.0

Posted Nov 13, 2015 22:10 UTC (Fri) by flussence (guest, #85566) [Link]

Oddly enough, that character is legible on my terminal and barely readable on the page. Both use vector fonts. You have a point though, Unifont beats them all by a mile.

And ironically, looking into it reveals the hard to read one is a CJK-specific font I had installed (aquapfont). Into the ~/.trash it goes...