Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Chinese, Japanese, Korean rockbox
Re: Chinese, Japanese, Korean rockbox
From: Greg Haerr <greg_at_censoft.com>
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2003 10:46:16 -0700
I agree with your comments. Do you have
an implementation/patch ready to go? Let me know
if you need some help, I'm also planning on adding
these binary formats back into the Microwindows
Project, since it doesn't yet have the enhanced bdf
: > So I propose that there be two font formats -
: > the existing one (possibly with a slight rev to
: > version
: > number for a few extra bits, see below), and your
: > new "disk-based" format, used only for fonts that
: > are deemed to large for in-core use. In this way
: > we won't require smaller fonts to always require
: > more
: > memory space.
: I agree, there should be two formats. Though by
: tweaking the cache index we could easily introduce the
: ability to load multiple fonts.
: > It's probably best that we try to stay somewhat
: > close to the existing format, since then we can
: > easily extend the existing tools to write both
: > font formats. Non-bdf sourced fonts would get
: > converted to the .fnt (style 1 or 2) format.
: Agree, no sense in re-inventing the wheel!
: > ULONG charset // add quick-access flag bits
: > for charset
: Think we should include revisions, e.g. GB2312-80, in
: case we have some auto-recognition code.
: > Do you think we need to worry about whether the
: > imagebits
: > words need to be byte-swapped or not?
: It's probably useful to include it as a flag. The
: implementation can decide what to do if the bytes are
: appropriate for the platform.
: Regards, Tat.
: Do you Yahoo!?
: Yahoo! Tax Center - File online, calculators, forms, and more
Received on 2003-04-05