From: Joaquin Cuenca Abela (e98cuenc@free.fr)
Date: Sun Jan 26 2003 - 06:25:08 EST
Andrew wrote:
> --- Martin Sevior <msevior@physics.unimelb.edu.au>
> wrote: > On Sat, 25 Jan 2003, Andrew Dunbar wrote:
> >
> > In the end we have to place glyphs in the screen at
> > integral values. The
> > only way to get close on screen to what will be
> > printed is the adjust EACH
> > glyph to be within 0.5 pixels of where it would be
> > on a high resolution
> > device. This is what Joaquin is arguing for and what
> > I agree with.
>
> The problem I was thinking of is with Arabic where all
> letters are supposed to join up exactly is we can
> never let a visible one pixel gap creep in here.
> Also, if two antialiased glyphs overlap by one pixel
> we need to ensure that the antialising is done after
> the overlapping or we will end up with artifacts.
> Perhaps these might be too tiny to notice - I couldn't
> say in advance.
I don't think that Arabic will be a problem. Usually glyphs get close
when you place them using linearly scaled distances, so you will not get
any gap. For the antialiasing, I don't think that it will be a problem
either, but we'll see :)
Cheers,
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sun Jan 26 2003 - 06:28:10 EST