mozilla AA fonts

[Nick Hudson]

This is what I do with Mozilla and Galeon2.  Mozilla has a option to
either use the web fonts the webpage specifies or you can specify one
font for the browser.  For me I choose 1 font for every webpage being
that in my opinion most webpages use ugly ass fonts.  It makes for
better reading and its a whole lot better looking than trying to render
webpage fonts that might not be AA to being with.  

As for editing your unix.js you really dont have to do that with Mozilla
1.3 if you have Xft compiled it, it kind of does it own its own.  As for
that webpage for me as I have all webpages rendering in 1 font they all
look the same.  You can take a look at some screenshopts I did to give
you a idea of what I am talking about:

http://www.nhudson.org/ss/mozilla-xft2.png
http://www.nhudson.org/ss/mozilla-gtk2.png

This next one is how I have my fonts setup in my prefrences under
Mozilla

http://www.nhudson.org/ss/mozilla.png 

If you have any questions or thoughts please let me know.  AA fonts are
a bit tricky and I work on it every day to try to fiond a better way of
doing things in Lunar with AA fonts.  Hopefully one day I will find a
solution that will solve alot of problems.  Main one that I run into
most if not all of the core fonts are not AA and cant be rendered that
way.  All of the ttf fonts are and they work well with Xft.  Now the
downside to the Core unix fonts is that some webpages I have run into
use those fonts that dont render AA at all and you get a horrible
looking font.  This is why I use 1 font to look at webpages, makes for
much easier living a reading on my eyes.

Nick




On 12 Apr 2003 18:18:08 +0000
Horn Gábor <Horn.Gabor at aktiv.co.hu> wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> 
> I use now mozilla 1.3, w/ enabled AA (editing unix.js, u know, i
> attach it to be sure). As i found not all the fonts r rendered w/ AA.
> A bit surprisingly for me, especially the original unix fonts has
> problems(the MS web core fonts are displayed nice in AA). I dig a bit
> the web to find a solution, and found the following page:
> 
> http://www.upsdell.com/BrowserNews/res_fonts.htm
> 
> This page has texts w/ all the common font styles, so one can easily
> check which fonts don't get displayed AA. Go to the Sample of Fonts
> section, there u can see the different fonts.
> 
> W/ a 'default' lunar install (installung truetype module), i have the
> following results:
> 
> Microsoft Core Web Fonts: All dispalyed properly w/ AA.
> 
> Common Windows Fonts: none of the serif fonts, but all the others are
> displayed AA.
> 
> Common Mac fonts: None of the fonts expect Charcoal and Geneva are
> displayed AA.
> 
> Common unix fonts: NONE of them is dispalyed AA!!!
> 
> So i think the problem is i have no ttf versions of eg the 'common
> unix fonts'. Only me?
> 
> I think linux and mozilla (and lunar :) is ready for displaying very
> nice AA in browsers, just we should organize the fonts a bit better.
> Could u check please the above page if that displays fonts properly
> for u? 
> 
> Sorry i know it's not exactly lunar related, but i think if we could
> have a nice solution for this, lunar could be among the bests in
> another parameter (i think now it's among them in package management
> and user/developer community and support).
> 
> thanks, hirisov
> 
> 


-- 
Nick Hudson

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
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=EP6T
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://dbguin.lunar-linux.org/pipermail/lunar/attachments/20030412/0a5e0e18/attachment.bin