From: Hubert Figuiere (hub@nyorp.abisource.com)
Date: Sun Apr 28 2002 - 05:45:45 EDT
----- Forwarded message from owner-abiword-dev@abisource.com -----
To: Blue Lizard <webmaster@dofty.zzn.com>
Cc: abiword-dev@abisource.com
Subject: Re: Pango?
References: <Pine.OSF.4.21.0204251638560.28726-100000@mccubbin.ph.unimelb.edu.au>
<1019768333.708.4.camel@c-24-98-8-129.atl.client2.attbi.com>
From: Havoc Pennington <hp@redhat.com>
Date: 25 Apr 2002 23:36:57 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1019768333.708.4.camel@c-24-98-8-129.atl.client2.attbi.com>
Message-ID: <y5wofg73zc6.fsf@icon.devel.redhat.com>
Lines: 23
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Blue Lizard <webmaster@dofty.zzn.com> writes:
> On Thu, 2002-04-25 at 02:46, Martin Sevior wrote:
> > It contains a lot of what we need but not everything we need. Nor is it
> > cross platform.
>
> This is an issue I have been thinking about a lot. The more abiword is
> integrated into gnome/pango (or for that matter any other platform
> specific thing) the more features get developed on that, and left out or
> made different on other platforms. Like, if we use pango for kerning,
> what does win32 do? qnx? solaris/cde users that dont want no stinking
> gnome build?
The options as I can figure them out are:
a) Use platform-specific engines, Pango/Uniscribe/etc.
b) Use one engine on all platforms
So a) has the problem you described, and b) doesn't. If Pango is used
as the engine in b) then there is no problem like the one you mention.
If you go with a), then Pango isn't creating the problem you mention,
the decision to go with a) is creating it.
Havoc
----- End forwarded message -----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Apr 28 2002 - 05:45:46 EDT