Debating OpenType 2.0 [LWN.net]

Debating OpenType 2.0

Posted Nov 6, 2015 7:31 UTC (Fri) by ncm (guest, #165)
In reply to: Debating OpenType 2.0 by smoogen
Parent article: Debating OpenType 2.0

Ha ha, good one. Simple and coherent, in a standard?

But people are understandably reluctant to accept Turing-complete specs for things that aren't supposed to be programs, not least because it makes them hard to optimize, never mind audit. And I think grey scales are considered a feature nowadays.

to post comments

Debating OpenType 2.0

Posted Nov 6, 2015 17:04 UTC (Fri) by smoogen (subscriber, #97) [Link]

I thought the postscript fonts were already turing complete... and we are using turing completeness in svg images and some other things. Also the selling point would be to patch in greyscales to MetaFont (i think from the previous articles there is a version with that to deal with scripts Metafont had problems with).. and that by being turing complete we can just ship patches later.

That's a selling point these days. {metafont as an internet of things....}