Panose issue status? (Re: [mpeg-OTspec] AHG activity kick-off)
John Hudson
john at tiro.ca
Mon Jul 16 19:22:21 CEST 2012
ichelle Perham wrote:
> We’ve had a bit more time to investigate this issue further. Considering
> the fact that the majority of the new implementations are based on
> Panose 1.5 – Microsoft agrees with the proposal to remove Panose 1.0
> values from OS/2 description and simply reference the 1.5 spec as is.
If the version of the Panose 1.5 spec hosted by Monotype Imaging at
http://panose.com/ is to be the normative reference, then some text
encoding bugs on that site need to be fixed. These bugs occur in lists
such as this one:
0-Any
1-No fit
2- Very Light …………………WeightRat ³ 35
3-Light………………… 18 £WeightRat < 35
4-Thin……………………10 £WeightRat < 18
5-Book ………………….7.5 £; WeightRat < 10
6-Medium……………….5.5 £WeightRat < 7.5
7-Demi ………………….4.5 £; WeightRat < 5.5
8-Bold …………………..3.5 £; WeightRat < 4.5
9-Heavy………………… 2.5 £; WeightRat < 3.5
10-Black………………… 2.0 £; WeightRat < 2.5
11-Extra Black………………… WeightRat < 2.0
Personally, even presuming the encoding is fixed, I think the selections
would be clearer if presented in English sentences, e.g.
6-Medium……………… WeightRat greater than 5.5 but less than 7.5
JH
PS. On the subject of Panose and Monotype, as I recall from a conference
conversation many years ago Monotype developed a tool for automatically
generating correct Panose values for fonts (I believe Dave Opstad coded
it). Since having accurate Panose information in fonts is of general
ecological benefit, I wonder if Monotype might be interested in open
sourcing or otherwise making that tool available?
--
Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
Gulf Islands, BC tiro at tiro.com
The criminologist's definition of 'public order
crimes' comes perilously close to the historian's
description of 'working-class leisure-time activity.'
- Sidney Harring, _Policing a Class Society_
More information about the mpeg-otspec
mailing list