RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
22 messages Options
Next » 12
Charles-H. Schulz Charles-H. Schulz
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

Okay, since you're in fingepointing mode, it is indeed my mistake to think
that fonts could not be embedded in MSO formats. I do maintain that very few
people know about this, and that by rule they're not included. Now, as for
humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way that ODF will lose if it
does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either.
If you wish to use .sla format instead of ODF, go ahead. Something tells me
that fonts embedding won't matter as it would require recipients to have
Scribus, which, although a great piece of software is less used and known
than LibO or OOo.

Best,

Charles.

Le 26 juin 2011, 1:15 PM, "plino" <[hidden email]> a écrit :

Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > <sigh> We do all have lots of responsibility,
all of us. I can assure...
Given your position in this community you should be humble enough to
recognize your mistake. But that is OT.

Being a Power User doesn't give me the Technical skills to be part of a TC.

In any case if OASIS and/or TDF have the will to add font embedding in ODF
there is no need to reinvent the wheel.

Scribus (http://www.scribus.net) an Open Source Desktop Publishing program
licensed under GPL already has this feature included in it's file format
.sla

Regards,
Pedro

--
View this message in context:
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Font-Embedding-in-ODF-was-RE-ANN-ODF-1-2-Candidate-OASIS-Standard-Enters-60-Day-Public-Review-tp3106577p3110076.html

Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
[hidden email] guidelines + mor...

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: RE : [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

Charles-H. Schulz wrote
Now, as for humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way that ODF will lose if it
does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either.
I didn't say that. I said that IF OASIS insists on refusing to embed fonts in ODF (which is what you also peremptorily affirmed, even though Dennis Hammilton in the ODF TC says it's not so) it is not the right file format for LibreOffice.

ODF doesn't loose any value as an open universal file format if it decides not to embed fonts. It just isn't right for an office suite.

In any case, it's my opinion. It doesn't lack humility.

Charles-H. Schulz wrote
If you wish to use .sla format instead of ODF, go ahead. Something tells me
that fonts embedding won't matter as it would require recipients to have
Scribus, which, although a great piece of software is less used and known
than LibO or OOo.
Again, that is not what I said. I was suggesting that if LO or OASIS want to consider embedding fonts there is an Open Source model you can use instead of starting from zero.
Charles-H. Schulz Charles-H. Schulz
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 09:41:07 -0700 (PDT),
plino <[hidden email]> a écrit :

>
> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> >
> > Now, as for humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way
> > that ODF will lose if it
> > does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either.
>
> I didn't say that. I said that IF OASIS insists on refusing to embed
> fonts in ODF (which is what you also peremptorily affirmed, even
> though Dennis Hammilton in the ODF TC says it's not so) it is not the
> right file format for LibreOffice.


Why? Note: I'm not saying it's a bad idea to embed fonts, I'm saying
(me, who's also part of that ODF TC) it's very unlikely. I think there
will be problems of many kinds, some of them being of legal nature
(esp. related to the use and distribution of fonts). But let me ask it
again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice?
Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us break
the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it?

>
> ODF doesn't loose any value as an open universal file format if it
> decides not to embed fonts. It just isn't right for an office suite.
>
> In any case, it's my opinion. It doesn't lack humility.


Okay... So let's get very practical here. You mentioned the case of
Impress presentations, and I think it's fair to say that what you have
described is something many of us has faced in the past, with .odp
files or .ppt files. Now here are two cases that would advocate for not
embedding fonts. What I'm trying to show here is that font embedding is
not the magical feature that's going to solve all of our problems, not
that embedding fonts is a bad idea in every case.

Case A: User Joe wants to use some super-duper fonts (called, font A)
for his presentation and embeds fonts within his sales pitch
presentation in .odp . Fonts A has been designed by designer Bob, who
specifically licensed them for non commercial usage. User Joe is
sending his presentation to customer Ike, his boss, Peter, and his
colleague, Ed. His presentation embeds fonts that are not eligible for
commercial use (per Designer Bob's terms). By using these fonts in his
presentation, User Joe has infringed the license 3 times. But it gets
worse. Customer Ike sends the presentation to his boss, Mary. 4 times.
Mary sends it to her head of accounting for validation. 5 times... And
so on. Do you get the point?

Case B: ODF is designed to be stable and -possibly- readable on a
variety of devices, even primary ones. Basically, you should be able to
extract and read information in a simpler mode from ODF documents. Let
me give you a practical example. I have a Mac, and Macs are actually
ODF capable. True, iWork (Apple office suite) does not provide ODF
support but Mac OS X does. If you open the nifty little text editor
inside Mac OS X called TextEdit, you can actually open and read ODF
documents (text, mostly). It does the job well, but it's a text editor.
So let's say  a friend of mine is organizing a Medieval style costumed
party. He sends invitations to me, and guess what, he also uses
LibreOffice or Calligra,  so all he has to do is picking one of
the gothic/medieval fonts on his system and write his invitation letter,
then sends it to me and others. In your view, let's say ODF can embed
fonts here, and so these fonts are embedded automatically.

But let's say I don't have LibreOffice on my mac. Let's say for a
moment I don't know LibreOffice. All I get in my Mail client is the
file, and when I open it on my Mac Text Edit pops up. What would
happen? Well, let's say ODF could embed fonts. Text Edit still would
not be able to display them. Why? It only uses a set of specific fonts;
it's a text editor, a "Word Pad" if you will, not an office suite. So
even if you embed it, you still lose their layout anyway.

My point is to show that embedding fonts is not going to be the end of
all problems. It will be a feature, and it might get problematic. I
think that for the sake of interoperability and usage, not embedding
fonts for an office file format is easier and avoids specific issues.
If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's
been designed, not ODF.


>
> Again, that is not what I said. I was suggesting that if LO or OASIS
> want to consider embedding fonts there is an Open Source model you
> can use instead of starting from zero.
>

Do you have any idea what it takes to spread the use of a format?

Best,
Charles.




--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

Charles-H. Schulz wrote
But let me ask it
again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice?
Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us break
the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it?
Because any document that allows the use of different fonts and relies on them to be displayed as expected needs to have the ability to embed fonts.
No, ODF already has the most important feature: vendor independence. But if the dominant vendor includes a feature and it is critical for some type of documents, not including it is a handicap. And it can become a serious barrier for wide adoption.

Regarding your demonstration Cases: Case A is a non-issue. If users decide to ignore instructions and use it incorrectly is it the OASIS or TDFs fault? Should microwave manufacturers not sell microwaves because someone in the future might have the brilliant idea of drying their cat in it?

Case B: if in a given device fonts are not displayed properly (the software should warn about that) then ODF is still doing it's most important job i.e. making sure the contents are displayed in a readable way.

Charles-H. Schulz wrote
If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's
been designed, not ODF.
PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity. It's not an editable format. Should I make my presentations using a PDF?
Following that reasoning I should use PPT for my presentations "That's the reason it's been designed, not ODF"

Charles-H. Schulz wrote
Do you have any idea what it takes to spread the use of a format?
No, I don't. But can you accept that it probably takes longer to accept a format that has limitations than if the format is superior to the one it's replacing?
How long will it take mkv to replace avi? Not much I guess ;)

Regards,
Pedro
Robert Derman Robert Derman
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

In reply to this post by Charles-H. Schulz
Charles-H. Schulz wrote:

> Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 09:41:07 -0700 (PDT),
> plino <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
>  
>> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
>>    
>>> Now, as for humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way
>>> that ODF will lose if it
>>> does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either.
>>>      
>> I didn't say that. I said that IF OASIS insists on refusing to embed
>> fonts in ODF (which is what you also peremptorily affirmed, even
>> though Dennis Hammilton in the ODF TC says it's not so) it is not the
>> right file format for LibreOffice.
>>    
>
>
> Why? Note: I'm not saying it's a bad idea to embed fonts, I'm saying
> (me, who's also part of that ODF TC) it's very unlikely. I think there
> will be problems of many kinds, some of them being of legal nature
> (esp. related to the use and distribution of fonts). But let me ask it
> again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice?
> Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us break
> the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it?
>
>  
>> ODF doesn't loose any value as an open universal file format if it
>> decides not to embed fonts. It just isn't right for an office suite.
>>
>> In any case, it's my opinion. It doesn't lack humility.
>>    
>
>
> Okay... So let's get very practical here. You mentioned the case of
> Impress presentations, and I think it's fair to say that what you have
> described is something many of us has faced in the past, with .odp
> files or .ppt files. Now here are two cases that would advocate for not
> embedding fonts. What I'm trying to show here is that font embedding is
> not the magical feature that's going to solve all of our problems, not
> that embedding fonts is a bad idea in every case.
>
> Case A: User Joe wants to use some super-duper fonts (called, font A)
> for his presentation and embeds fonts within his sales pitch
> presentation in .odp . Fonts A has been designed by designer Bob, who
> specifically licensed them for non commercial usage. User Joe is
> sending his presentation to customer Ike, his boss, Peter, and his
> colleague, Ed. His presentation embeds fonts that are not eligible for
> commercial use (per Designer Bob's terms). By using these fonts in his
> presentation, User Joe has infringed the license 3 times. But it gets
> worse. Customer Ike sends the presentation to his boss, Mary. 4 times.
> Mary sends it to her head of accounting for validation. 5 times... And
> so on. Do you get the point?
>  
This reminds me of something I once heard, I think it was on the OOo
Discuss list, anyway a number of users were proposing a font "Blacklist"
that would list those fonts with too restrictive licensing.  End users
would be advised not to purchase, download or use any of the fonts on
the list.  It would be kind of a persona-non-grata of fonts.  The upshot
of it was that it was a way of saying to font designers/publishers --
"If that's the way you want to be with your licensing, then you can keep
your darned font!"

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

steveedmonds steveedmonds
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

Hi.

On 2011-06-27 14:17, Robert Derman wrote:

> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
>> Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 09:41:07 -0700 (PDT),
>> plino <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>>
>>  
>>> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
>>>    
>>>> Now, as for humility, claiming in an assured and definitive way
>>>> that ODF will lose if it
>>>> does not embed fonts is not exactly humble either.
>>>>      
>>> I didn't say that. I said that IF OASIS insists on refusing to embed
>>> fonts in ODF (which is what you also peremptorily affirmed, even
>>> though Dennis Hammilton in the ODF TC says it's not so) it is not the
>>> right file format for LibreOffice.
>>>    
>>
>>
>> Why? Note: I'm not saying it's a bad idea to embed fonts, I'm saying
>> (me, who's also part of that ODF TC) it's very unlikely. I think there
>> will be problems of many kinds, some of them being of legal nature
>> (esp. related to the use and distribution of fonts). But let me ask it
>> again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice?
>> Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us break
>> the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it?
>>
>>  
>>> ODF doesn't loose any value as an open universal file format if it
>>> decides not to embed fonts. It just isn't right for an office suite.
>>>
>>> In any case, it's my opinion. It doesn't lack humility.
>>>    
>>
>>
>> Okay... So let's get very practical here. You mentioned the case of
>> Impress presentations, and I think it's fair to say that what you have
>> described is something many of us has faced in the past, with .odp
>> files or .ppt files. Now here are two cases that would advocate for not
>> embedding fonts. What I'm trying to show here is that font embedding is
>> not the magical feature that's going to solve all of our problems, not
>> that embedding fonts is a bad idea in every case.
>> Case A: User Joe wants to use some super-duper fonts (called, font A)
>> for his presentation and embeds fonts within his sales pitch
>> presentation in .odp . Fonts A has been designed by designer Bob, who
>> specifically licensed them for non commercial usage. User Joe is
>> sending his presentation to customer Ike, his boss, Peter, and his
>> colleague, Ed. His presentation embeds fonts that are not eligible for
>> commercial use (per Designer Bob's terms). By using these fonts in his
>> presentation, User Joe has infringed the license 3 times. But it gets
>> worse. Customer Ike sends the presentation to his boss, Mary. 4 times.
>> Mary sends it to her head of accounting for validation. 5 times... And
>> so on. Do you get the point?
>>  
> This reminds me of something I once heard, I think it was on the OOo
> Discuss list, anyway a number of users were proposing a font
> "Blacklist" that would list those fonts with too restrictive
> licensing.  End users would be advised not to purchase, download or
> use any of the fonts on the list.  It would be kind of a
> persona-non-grata of fonts.  The upshot of it was that it was a way of
> saying to font designers/publishers -- "If that's the way you want to
> be with your licensing, then you can keep your darned font!"
>
This is a problem that practically affects our company. The
practicalities do not change the outcome or licensing considerations,
only the difficulty of using LO and ODF.

We have a number of custom fonts representing control panel displays, we
use these to write operator manuals, we send the manuals to various
people for editing and we send the manuals out for translation (other
language versions). We also use Arial as the standard font.

We find the arial font varies from machine to machine, and the writing
reflows and layout is upset. We need our custom fonts. Our present
solution is to email the odt and attach the fonts to the email, so the
fonts just tag along with the document for the user to install, not
convenient and everyone gets the fonts.

The better solution is to include the fonts required in the odt file
just for LO use (like MS, and 2 previously mentioned word processors).
This also enables more control on use of the licensed fonts, if even
just a big warning "Have you checked your terms of use" and they can't
be saved as system fonts for general use.
steve

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Keith Curtis Keith Curtis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

On Sun, Jun 26, 2011 at 8:44 PM, Steve Edmonds
<[hidden email]>wrote:

>
> The better solution is to include the fonts required in the odt file
> just for LO use (like MS, and 2 previously mentioned word processors).
>

That is another solution, but not necessarily a better solution. I think a
better solution is to ship the TTF once rather than embedding it into every
file. PDFs only include the characters that are in use, where the ODF would
need to include the whole thing. You also can have problems with versioning
(what if the version on the computer is newer than the one in the ODT?) I
recommend people ship fonts out of band like are done with hyphenation
tables.

Regards,

-Keith

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Keith Curtis Keith Curtis
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

In reply to this post by Robert Derman
In order to succeed, a mass movement must develop at the earliest
moment a compact corporate organization and a capacity to integrate
all comers.

—Eric Hoffer, American philosopher

This discussion is interesting but it reminds me of people
re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Or, perhaps a better analogy
is where there are two battleships, one is 30x bigger and the other is
undermanned. In fact, there is only a skeleton crew so if there is a
problem in many areas of the ship, there is no one able to fix it.
Meanwhile, some of the crew are sitting on deck chairs discussing how
they'd like a better battleship, but they are at sea so it is not
possible now.

I believe the best way to ensure TDF's success is for you to find a
crew to fix all of these as fast as possible:
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Easy_Hacks

Forks often take years to get going because they take years to get a
large enough of a team. That is a random list, but the sooner you can
fix those, the sooner you can fix other things including font
features. Fixing bugs is the way to be able to write features. People
can work anywhere they want, but that is the front door, and evidence
you need more. People with expertise already are valuable. It is good
is that you have people who are able to mentor others. Some forks
didn't even have that. You need to find enough people so you have
expertise over every line, which I don't think you have today.

I also hope there is a crew hacking ribbon-like UIs in Python, one
working on server and web features, etc. If you want to succeed in a
decade, and you are mostly going to be volunteers, you need many,
focused on things that improve the product today.

You can keep a positive attitude by remembering there is another
battleship that is 10x undermanned than you ;-) It says OpenOffice,
etc. on the side, but that is not the most important consideration.

Kind regards,

-Keith
http://keithcu.com/

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
marcpare4 marcpare4
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

In reply to this post by Pedro
Hi Pedro and Charles et al

Le 2011-06-26 17:21, plino a écrit :

> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
>> But let me ask it
>> again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice?
>> Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us break
>> the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it?
>>
> Because any document that allows the use of different fonts and relies on
> them to be displayed as expected needs to have the ability to embed fonts.
> No, ODF already has the most important feature: vendor independence. But if
> the dominant vendor includes a feature and it is critical for some type of
> documents, not including it is a handicap. And it can become a serious
> barrier for wide adoption.
>
> Regarding your demonstration Cases: Case A is a non-issue. If users decide
> to ignore instructions and use it incorrectly is it the OASIS or TDFs fault?
> Should microwave manufacturers not sell microwaves because someone in the
> future might have the brilliant idea of drying their cat in it?

If the ODF were to embed fonts, then there would also be documentation
re: use/abuse of embedded fonts which would be publicly available.
LibreOffice should already be advocating fonts that do not have any
licensing restrictions -- maybe we should consider adding a blurb on
this on our website as an advocacy item regarding font usage. Having
said all this, I also agree, if the user just ignores these
recommendations and warnings, then I am sure that the OASIS group would
not be held liable.

> Case B: if in a given device fonts are not displayed properly (the software
> should warn about that) then ODF is still doing it's most important job i.e.
> making sure the contents are displayed in a readable way.

If the text editor cannot render the file correctly then the LibreOffice
reader should be used. This is exactly a good example where a
LibreOffice reader would be used.

Cheers

Marc

--
Marc Paré
http://www.parEntreprise.com


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Charles-H. Schulz Charles-H. Schulz
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

In reply to this post by Pedro
Hello Pedro,


Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 14:21:25 -0700 (PDT),
plino <[hidden email]> a écrit :

>
> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> >
> > But let me ask it
> > again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice?
> > Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us
> > break the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it?
> >
>
> Because any document that allows the use of different fonts and
> relies on them to be displayed as expected needs to have the ability
> to embed fonts. No, ODF already has the most important feature:
> vendor independence. But if the dominant vendor includes a feature
> and it is critical for some type of documents, not including it is a
> handicap. And it can become a serious barrier for wide adoption.

I don't necessarily agree on that -MS OOXML includes features you don't
find inside ODF but few people even know they are there- but while this
feature is important to you I strongly feel  that it's something
very, very few MS Office users know about...

>
> Regarding your demonstration Cases: Case A is a non-issue. If users
> decide to ignore instructions and use it incorrectly is it the OASIS
> or TDFs fault? Should microwave manufacturers not sell microwaves
> because someone in the future might have the brilliant idea of drying
> their cat in it?

Oh, there are lawsuits like that every month. Remember there are record
labels suing BitTorrent just because it can be used to download music?

>
> Case B: if in a given device fonts are not displayed properly (the
> software should warn about that)

But in the case of TextEdit, it doesn't, and good luck to have Apple
fix that.

> then ODF is still doing it's most
> important job i.e. making sure the contents are displayed in a
> readable way.


That is right.

>
>
> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> > If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's
> > been designed, not ODF.
>
> PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity.

layout fidelity. Which means printing fidelity and visual fidelity, not
only for printing.


> It's not an editable
> format. Should I make my presentations using a PDF?


What you can do is export your presentations under PDF. Many people do
that.

> Following that reasoning I should use PPT for my presentations
> "That's the reason it's been designed, not ODF"

Here's the glitch: You would have to set that specific option for PPT.
If you send it to me maybe I won't be able to read them.


>
>
> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
> > Do you have any idea what it takes to spread the use of a format?
>
> No, I don't. But can you accept that it probably takes longer to
> accept a format that has limitations than if the format is superior
> to the one it's replacing?


Except that these "limitations" do not seem to be crucial for many
people.But to come back to spreading the use of a format: its features
are not what will make the format's use spread (in the office documents
context), it's the choice of applications + the adoption policy +
raising the awareness + ecosystem development + change management
inside organizations using it .


> How long will it take mkv to replace avi? Not much I guess ;)


Bad example, I think. .avi is not dependent on a dominant player
imposing the use of its own formats. How long will it take to .ogg to
replace .mp3 or .m4a?

Best,
Charles.


>
> Regards,
> Pedro
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RE-tdf-discuss-Re-Font-Embedding-in-ODF-was-RE-ANN-ODF-1-2-Candidate-OASIS-Standard-Enters-60-Day-Pu-tp3110117p3111827.html
> Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Davide Dozza Davide Dozza
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

In reply to this post by Pedro
Il 26/06/2011 23:21, plino ha scritto:
[...]

>
> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
>> If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's
>> been designed, not ODF.
>
> PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity. It's not an editable format.

OOo, LibO, Symphony, Word, Abiword, Koffice and so on are tools for
editing documents and not for keeping viewing *and* printing fidelity.
For such purpose you should use desktop publishing software which has a
complete different approach (i.e. Inkscape).

Also for PDF, embedding fonts is an option. Only for PDF-A it's mandatory.

> Should I make my presentations using a PDF?

Yes. By embedding your fonts if you want to be *reasonable* sure that
you will open the file and obtain a similar result in the future.

If you want to be *more sure* export it in PDF-A which is a subset of PDF.

You must be persuaded that there is a trade off. You can't use a
microwave oven to dry your cat.

Davide


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Jesper Lund Stocholm Jesper Lund Stocholm
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

Hi Davide,

2011/6/27 Davide Dozza <[hidden email]>:

> Il 26/06/2011 23:21, plino ha scritto:
> [...]
>
>>
>> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
>>> If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's
>>> been designed, not ODF.
>>
>> PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity. It's not an editable format.
>
> OOo, LibO, Symphony, Word, Abiword, Koffice and so on are tools for
> editing documents and not for keeping viewing *and* printing fidelity.
> For such purpose you should use desktop publishing software which has a
> complete different approach (i.e. Inkscape).
>
> Also for PDF, embedding fonts is an option. Only for PDF-A it's mandatory.
>
>> Should I make my presentations using a PDF?
>
> Yes. By embedding your fonts if you want to be *reasonable* sure that
> you will open the file and obtain a similar result in the future.

Aren't you guys really talking sortof detached from "the real world?"
(no disrespect intended).

Even though you might be right that you could pass around documents as
PDF/A, the reality is that users simply don't do that. Users create
their content in Writer, Impress, Calc etc and they pass those files
around and not their PDF-counter parts. This is really orthogonal to
the collaboration process - be that "for view" or for "for editing".
Also, suggesting to use PDF for Impress-files is not really going to
work. This will effectively stop any animations, transformation,
embedded multimedia etc from being of any use.

So in the real world users (not all, of course) *will* be troubled
about this, they *will* look for alternatives and they *will* blame
LibO/ODF for this feature lack ... regardless that usage of PDF would
seem like a better choice for them.

Personally I don't really understand why ODF TC (or, Charles in
particular) is to adamant in not wanting to add embedding of fonts to
ODF. It seems like a small addition to ODF-spec and would serve the
purpose of users that have no other alternative than use Microsoft
Office. On the other hand I agree completely that ODF TC should be
presented with "working code" presumably in a branch of e.g. LibO
where (the value of) the functionality is demonstrated.



--
Jesper Lund Stocholm
www.idippedut.dk
SC34/WG4 http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/wg4/

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Davide Dozza Davide Dozza
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)


Hi Jesper,

Il 27/06/2011 10:49, Jesper Lund Stocholm ha scritto:

> Hi Davide,
>
> 2011/6/27 Davide Dozza <[hidden email]>:
>> Il 26/06/2011 23:21, plino ha scritto:
>> [...]
>>
>>>
>>> Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
>>>> If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's
>>>> been designed, not ODF.
>>>
>>> PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity. It's not an editable format.
>>
>> OOo, LibO, Symphony, Word, Abiword, Koffice and so on are tools for
>> editing documents and not for keeping viewing *and* printing fidelity.
>> For such purpose you should use desktop publishing software which has a
>> complete different approach (i.e. Inkscape).
>>
>> Also for PDF, embedding fonts is an option. Only for PDF-A it's mandatory.
>>
>>> Should I make my presentations using a PDF?
>>
>> Yes. By embedding your fonts if you want to be *reasonable* sure that
>> you will open the file and obtain a similar result in the future.
>
> Aren't you guys really talking sortof detached from "the real world?"
> (no disrespect intended).

I've been working on OOo migrations since 2003. Especially for PA. I
think I'm not detached from the real world.... ;-)

>
> Even though you might be right that you could pass around documents as
> PDF/A, the reality is that users simply don't do that. Users create
> their content in Writer, Impress, Calc etc and they pass those files
> around and not their PDF-counter parts. This is really orthogonal to
> the collaboration process - be that "for view" or for "for editing".
> Also, suggesting to use PDF for Impress-files is not really going to
> work. This will effectively stop any animations, transformation,
> embedded multimedia etc from being of any use.

I wish I opened Word 5.0 files in the same way as I did 20 years ago but....

One thing it's what people wish, another what the law requires and yet
another is what technology offers.

For a PA when a document has to be long-term archived only in a
electronic way, the Italian law requires PDF/A. Fidelity is a must.

You have to keep in mind that there is a trade off between features and
fidelity.

Because fidelity it's a question of rendering algorithms: more features
means more complexity for such algorithms.

Therefore the more fidelity you ask the less features you have.
That why PDF/A has been created.

>
> So in the real world users (not all, of course) *will* be troubled
> about this, they *will* look for alternatives and they *will* blame
> LibO/ODF for this feature lack ... regardless that usage of PDF would
> seem like a better choice for them.
>
> Personally I don't really understand why ODF TC (or, Charles in
> particular) is to adamant in not wanting to add embedding of fonts to
> ODF. It seems like a small addition to ODF-spec and would serve the
> purpose of users that have no other alternative than use Microsoft
> Office. On the other hand I agree completely that ODF TC should be
> presented with "working code" presumably in a branch of e.g. LibO
> where (the value of) the functionality is demonstrated.
>

This is another question. We can discuss about embedding font in ODF but
please don't sell it for document fidelity reasons.

Davide


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Jesper Lund Stocholm Jesper Lund Stocholm
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

Hi Davide,

2011/6/27 Davide Dozza <[hidden email]>:
>

> I've been working on OOo migrations since 2003. Especially for PA. I
> think I'm not detached from the real world.... ;-)

:o)

> One thing it's what people wish, another what the law requires and yet
> another is what technology offers.
>
> For a PA when a document has to be long-term archived only in a
> electronic way, the Italian law requires PDF/A. Fidelity is a must.

But we are not talking about document archiving here, are we? We are
talking about round-tripping documents.

> You have to keep in mind that there is a trade off between features and
> fidelity.
>
> Because fidelity it's a question of rendering algorithms: more features
> means more complexity for such algorithms.

Yes

> Therefore the more fidelity you ask the less features you have.
> That why PDF/A has been created.

> This is another question. We can discuss about embedding font in ODF but
> please don't sell it for document fidelity reasons.

But this *is* for fidelity reasons - just not meant for archiving. If
I send my team (e.g. in India) a document created in Impress or
Writer, I want the document to be opened in more or less exact the
same form it was sent. This has nothing to do about being able to open
the document 20 years from now or about legal requirements for
archiving (in Denmark, TIFF and JPEG are only allowed formats). This
has to do with sending documents around *now* and to enable any
recipient to have all information readily available for displaying the
document in the form I created it in.

:o)

--
Jesper Lund Stocholm
www.idippedut.dk
SC34/WG4 http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/wg4/

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote
But we are not talking about document archiving here, are we? We are
talking about round-tripping documents.

<snip>

But this *is* for fidelity reasons - just not meant for archiving. If
I send my team (e.g. in India) a document created in Impress or
Writer, I want the document to be opened in more or less exact the
same form it was sent. This has nothing to do about being able to open
the document 20 years from now or about legal requirements for
archiving (in Denmark, TIFF and JPEG are only allowed formats). This
has to do with sending documents around *now* and to enable any
recipient to have all information readily available for displaying the
document in the form I created it in.
Thank you for contributing here Jesper.

I think that TDF members are failing to see that LibreOffice documents are expected to be editable.

And that suggesting that users should use PDF for a presentation is absurd (I won't even get into the Draw domain where this is even more important). It doesn't make ANY sense to create a presentation in an application that allows dynamic transitions, animations, videos, interactive slides and then save the output as a static PDF...

If ODF is the file format for LibreOffice then it must support all requirements for all the LibreOffice applications. We are not talking about the word processor only (Writer)
m.a.riosv m.a.riosv
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF (was RE: ANN: ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard Enters 60-Day Public Review)

In reply to this post by Keith Curtis
+1
Less words, more work.

El 27/06/11 7:07, Keith Curtis escribió:

> In order to succeed, a mass movement must develop at the earliest
> moment a compact corporate organization and a capacity to integrate
> all comers.
>
> —Eric Hoffer, American philosopher
>
> This discussion is interesting but it reminds me of people
> re-arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. Or, perhaps a better analogy
> is where there are two battleships, one is 30x bigger and the other is
> undermanned. In fact, there is only a skeleton crew so if there is a
> problem in many areas of the ship, there is no one able to fix it.
> Meanwhile, some of the crew are sitting on deck chairs discussing how
> they'd like a better battleship, but they are at sea so it is not
> possible now.
>
> I believe the best way to ensure TDF's success is for you to find a
> crew to fix all of these as fast as possible:
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Development/Easy_Hacks
>
> Forks often take years to get going because they take years to get a
> large enough of a team. That is a random list, but the sooner you can
> fix those, the sooner you can fix other things including font
> features. Fixing bugs is the way to be able to write features. People
> can work anywhere they want, but that is the front door, and evidence
> you need more. People with expertise already are valuable. It is good
> is that you have people who are able to mentor others. Some forks
> didn't even have that. You need to find enough people so you have
> expertise over every line, which I don't think you have today.
>
> I also hope there is a crew hacking ribbon-like UIs in Python, one
> working on server and web features, etc. If you want to succeed in a
> decade, and you are mostly going to be volunteers, you need many,
> focused on things that improve the product today.
>
> You can keep a positive attitude by remembering there is another
> battleship that is 10x undermanned than you ;-) It says OpenOffice,
> etc. on the side, but that is not the most important consideration.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> -Keith
> http://keithcu.com/
>


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

bedipp bedipp
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF

In reply to this post by Pedro
Hi Pedro, all,

it seems that you didn't get the real messages:

1) Charles doesn't insist in keeping embedded fonts our of ODF

2) Dennis Hamilton already told everybody here how such a goal
could be achieved (by a working implementation).

3) Several people (including OASIS TC members) mentioned quite
important problems on the way towards such an implementation.

4) In the eyes of the most community members taking part in this thread
there are other - much more urgent - topics where they want to spend
their time with.

So please stop repeating your statements and allege that TDF members
wouldn't know about the basics of ODF.

If you want such a feature become true, create a team working on this
topic, solve the restrictions pointed to by different people and find /
convince / pay one or more developer to work on such an implementation.

I could imagine an extension linking shipped fonts to the product to use
them in addition to the fonts already present on the OS and adding the
fonts used in a document to the document's structure.

But I'm not a developer and I didn't see any developer raising his hand
here in this thread.

If this topic is the most important to you, you will find people to join
you in maintaining the work.

But you really need to start working - repeated discussions will not
lead anywhere but to frustration on all sides...

plino schrieb:

>
> [...]
>
> I think that TDF members are failing to see that LibreOffice documents are
> expected to be editable.
>
> [...]
>
> If ODF is the file format for LibreOffice then it must support all
> requirements for all the LibreOffice applications. We are not talking about
> the word processor only (Writer)

ODF will never support *all* requirements for each of the LibreOffice
applications.

There are always compromises - based on computing time, concurring
issues, file size, development resources and so on.

But as LibreOffice is a meritocracy it's easy to raise awareness on your
favorite issue: Just implement it (or have it implemented) in a way that
doesn't break any other part of the program. If all the external
criteria are met too, it is very likely that you will be applauded for
your work!

Best regards

Bernhard

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF

Hi Bernard

bedipp wrote
1) Charles doesn't insist in keeping embedded fonts out of ODF
I NEVER said this. Please quote the right person.

I'm not a developer and I certainly don't intend to waste my time let alone pay for a feature that is so unimportant to everyone.

Thank you for your suggestions.
Dennis E. Hamilton Dennis E. Hamilton
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF

In reply to this post by bedipp
+1

-----Original Message-----
From: Bernhard Dippold [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 12:24
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Font Embedding in ODF

[ ... ]

If you want such a feature become true, create a team working on this
topic, solve the restrictions pointed to by different people and find /
convince / pay one or more developer to work on such an implementation.

I could imagine an extension linking shipped fonts to the product to use
them in addition to the fonts already present on the OS and adding the
fonts used in a document to the document's structure.

But I'm not a developer and I didn't see any developer raising his hand
here in this thread.

If this topic is the most important to you, you will find people to join
you in maintaining the work.

But you really need to start working - repeated discussions will not
lead anywhere but to frustration on all sides...

[ ... ]

[A]s LibreOffice is a meritocracy it's easy to raise awareness on your
favorite issue: Just implement it (or have it implemented) in a way that
doesn't break any other part of the program. If all the external
criteria are met too, it is very likely that you will be applauded for
your work!

Best regards

Bernhard



--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Pedro Pedro
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Font Embedding in ODF

Today I found the most interesting article on ODF, which explains why it doesn't support font embedding:

http://blogs.gnome.org/mortenw/2010/02/10/odf-plus-five-years/

ODF was created in a hurry to support text files. Later some people started to worry about spreadsheets (apparently not that much). Maybe in the future it will support the features that presentations and vector drawings require.

Only then it will make sense to use ODF as the file format for all OOo/LO applications.
Next » 12