[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[ft-devel] Font Validator 2.0, and libre font test results
From: |
Hin-Tak Leung |
Subject: |
[ft-devel] Font Validator 2.0, and libre font test results |
Date: |
Mon, 18 Jul 2016 21:38:14 +0000 (UTC) |
Hi,
It is a bit like the Mac OS X native binaries - it took a long time to get the
command-line to work, then another week later, the GUI follows. So last weekend
the rasterization test (which tests for truetype hinting instructions) which
Microsoft did not release, got the beginning of an re-implementation in the
Font Validator. That was the final missing piece that Microsoft did not
release. Since then, I have tested against all(?) the fonts on Fedora linux
(about 1750 of those), MS Win 8.1 (~300), Apple's (~700) and my private stash
of just over 2000 rather old and buggy mostly CJK fonts - CJK fonts are few and
far between, so you hang on to the vaguely useable and interesting ones,
however buggy they are... It has been a week of repeated testing on almost 5000
fonts in total.
Another week later, I am comfortable to call the new version 2.0, gpg signing
the commit tag, and gpg signing the binary uploads, all for the first time
after almost a year of intermittent snapshot dated releases calling them
"year-month-day".
Here are the compressed results, divided into 1.0 (i.e. from the older
binary-only version of Font Validator) / 2.0 (the new one), texlive
/non-texlive part of the tests, concerning libre fonts on Fedora Linux; and
there are the *font-list* summary which just lists the problematic font names
in each division. Just on B/W, Size 10. (I don't have the CPU power to run 5000
fonts through the standard test, which is B/W + Gray + sub-pixel, at Size 4 to
72 +..., it takes about 200 x
longer).
I have separated the texlive part just because they are more platform-neutral
and likely to be reachable via multiple different channels.
If you recognize the name of any of the fonts and know the owner, please direct
them to the flaw detail files to look at the listed flaw details.
http://htl10.users.sourceforge.net/tmp/FontVal-test-results-2016July/
The older binary-only Font Validator 1.0 flags about 1/3 of libre fonts on
fedora linux as problematic; the new 2.0, about 15%.
The 2.0 result is just fewer - and possibly less annoying to some, not to chase
phantom flaws which aren't there. Two fonts are in the 2.0 list which were not
in the 1.0 - mona-VLGothic.ttf and wqy-microhei.ttc . The former get flagged
because it is a bitmap font being tested at size 10 which it does not provide,
so please ignore. The latter I do not know why - most of the glyph-level flaws
appear to be genuine. I'd be a bit annoyed, for example, if the font developers
put in hinting instructions to detect what host platform the font is being used
on, to pass in 1.0 . Anyway, the font reports between 1.0 and 2.0 largely
agrees, so I am happy to call the new version Font Validator 2.0, finally.
Code at[1], windows/mono binaries at [2] and the donate button at [3] , as
usual, and please do click and make a donation if you find it useful. I still
haven't got round to making the Mac OS X binaries, despite saying so last week
- tell you a little secret: the windows binary runs about 2 to 3 times faster
in wine + dotnet on linux [4], compared to running with native mono. And plus
the inconvenience of a patched non-system freetype, it just seems hardly worth
the effort to go native, merely to run slower - but I'll make the Mac OS X
binaries one day. oh, BTW, Font Validator 2.0 is about 9 times faster than 1.0,
on windows. I do not know why, but really glad.
[1] https://github.com/HinTak/Font-Validator
[2]
https://sourceforge.net/projects/hp-pxl-jetready/files/Microsoft%20Font%20Validator/
[3] https://sourceforge.net/p/hp-pxl-jetready/donate/
[4] Note the default wine configuration is wine + wine-mono, not wine + dotnet .
- [ft-devel] Font Validator 2.0, and libre font test results,
Hin-Tak Leung <=