Opened 6 years ago

Last modified 6 years ago

#8221 new defect

We need better Arabic fonts

Reported by: khaled Owned by: cscott
Priority: high Milestone: 8.2.0 (was Update.2)
Component: distro Version: not specified
Keywords: polish:8.2.0 csafor8.2 Cc: sayamindu, subhodipbiswas@…
Blocked By: Blocking: #6808
Deployments affected: Action Needed: test in release
Verified: no

Description

The current default Arabic font (PakType) is very ugly and unreadable that I think it should be removed. Other fonts doesn't fully cover Arabic script; KACST fonts only support Arabic and Nafees fonts only support Urdu. There is also no fixed width Arabic font.

In short I think we should get ride of paktype-fonts and kacst-fonts and replace them with a more readable with wider coverage Arabic fonts.

Attachments (2)

arabeyes-core-fonts.spec (2.3 KB) - added by khaled 6 years ago.
spec file
arabeyes-core-fontconfig.conf (577 bytes) - added by khaled 6 years ago.

Download all attachments as: .zip

Change History (23)

comment:1 Changed 6 years ago by khaled

I've been working on a set of "core" Arabic fonts that has rough equivalents to serif, sans-serif and monospace fonts, and cover Arabic, Urdu, Pashto and Farsi languages. I'm preparing a fedora package for them.

comment:2 Changed 6 years ago by kimquirk

  • Keywords polish:8.2.0 added
  • Milestone changed from Not Triaged to 8.2.0 (was Update.2)

Please try to get this in the next few days if possible.

Changed 6 years ago by khaled

spec file

comment:3 Changed 6 years ago by khaled

This spec file has the sans-serif and monospace fonts, which are the most important ones, serif font might be ready shortly.
Could some one with more fedora experience help upstreaming the package?

Changed 6 years ago by khaled

comment:4 Changed 6 years ago by mstone

  • Action Needed changed from never set to package
  • Component changed from distro to fedora
  • Owner changed from mstone to fedora_olpc

First, add an entry to the OLPC Package Wishlist and then send some mail to fedora-olpc-list@rh.c or https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list@rh.c. These actions will put you in touch with others who may be able to help. (You could also write directly to the Fedora maintainers of your favorite font packages since they are also likely to have the necessary expertise.)

comment:5 Changed 6 years ago by khaled

Sorry, I'll be offline to the end of this week, if this is urgent, could some one package it for OLPC until we push it to fedora?

comment:6 Changed 6 years ago by gregorio

  • Cc sayamindu added

Hi Khaled,

can you or someone else send an e-mail to fedora-olpc-list at redhat.com to get help packaging.

Need this in ASAP...

Thanks,

Greg S

comment:7 Changed 6 years ago by sayamindu

  • Cc subhodipbiswas@… added

I poked Subhodip on IRC to package the fonts, and he has put up a request for review at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461139

Subhodip - could you ask the fedora-olpc list if someone can review the request ?

comment:8 Changed 6 years ago by khaled

Great! I was going to check this, when I saw this comment.

comment:9 Changed 6 years ago by sayamindu

As per the review, the font package had to be split into two. The second review request is at https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462711

comment:10 Changed 6 years ago by sayamindu

  • Action Needed changed from package to add to build
  • Component changed from fedora to distro
  • Owner changed from fedora_olpc to cscott

The two fonts are packaged in my public_rpms (home/sayamindu/public_rpms/joyride). The filenames are:

Mothanna-fonts-0.02-3.olpc3.noarch.rpm
Mothanna-fonts-0.02-3.olpc3.src.rpm

Thabit-fonts-0.02-3.fc9.noarch.rpm
Thabit-fonts-0.02-3.fc9.src.rpm

Scott, please add them, to joyride.

comment:11 follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by cscott

I assume these will be upstreamed into fedora eventually?

The original requester asked that paktype-fonts and kacst-fonts be removed as well, is that correct?

comment:12 in reply to: ↑ 11 Changed 6 years ago by sayamindu

Replying to cscott:

I assume these will be upstreamed into fedora eventually?

yes. The upstream requests for package review are https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=461139 and https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=462711

The original requester asked that paktype-fonts and kacst-fonts be removed as well, is that correct?

Yes, I think it should be safe to remove those two fonts.

comment:13 Changed 6 years ago by sayamindu

I just noticed that the fonts-arabic package needs to be removed as well. paktype and kacst are dependencies of this metapackage.

comment:14 Changed 6 years ago by cscott

  • Action Needed changed from add to build to test in build
  • Keywords csafor8.2 added

Change made to joyride; should be in joyride-2474 or later. Please test in joyride, and if arabic looks right, move the 'action needed' tag to 'approve for release' to get the change into the next stable release candidate.

comment:15 follow-up: Changed 6 years ago by sayamindu

I noticed two serious issues wrt numerals in these fonts

  1. With the Mothanna font selected in Write, I get stars instead of digits
  2. With the Thabit font selected, I get Latin digits (1,2,3,4,5..)

(2) happens in the mesh searchbar as well.

Khaled, is this intentional ? Moreover, I notice that in the Mothanna font (I opened it with a font-editor), there are a lot of star symbols (which look like place-holders to me).

Scott, I suggest that we keep the current fonts till Khaled replies on this. I'm not very familiar with Arabic, so I would prefer to remain conservative here, more so since we already ship Arabic fonts (though quite ugly).

comment:16 in reply to: ↑ 15 Changed 6 years ago by khaled

Replying to sayamindu:

I noticed two serious issues wrt numerals in these fonts

  1. With the Mothanna font selected in Write, I get stars instead of digits

The font doesn't contain any Latin characters or European digits, I think this is a bug in AbiWord's font substitution and fall back mechanism (among its other bugs)

  1. With the Thabit font selected, I get Latin digits (1,2,3,4,5..)

Thabit includes Latin glyphs from IBM's courier font, but if you type Arabic digits (Indo-Arabic) you'll get them.

(2) happens in the mesh searchbar as well.

This isn't clear to me, olpc Arabic keyboard layout has Arabic digits, if you switched the layout you should get Arabic digits.

Khaled, is this intentional ? Moreover, I notice that in the Mothanna font (I opened it with a font-editor), there are a lot of star symbols (which look like place-holders to me).

They are place holders to convince some software (Qt4) that the font supports Arabic, if those glyphs were empty Qt4 won't use the Arabic part of the font, though (because of the way this font is designed) I don't need them. However, those stars shouldn't appear in the output, otherwise it is a bug in the application.

comment:17 Changed 6 years ago by sayamindu

Hmm.. I tried again, and saw proper characters in Write again. Maybe this is the unpredictable behaviour shown by Write from time to time ?
I'll start with a clean image from scratch and test again. If I get proper behaviour, I'll ask for a Approve for release.

comment:18 Changed 6 years ago by sayamindu

| Test Case |

  1. Edit /etc/sysconfig/keyboard to look like
    KEYTABLE="us"
    XKB_MODEL="olpc"
    XKB_LAYOUT="us,ara"
    XKB_VARIANT="olpc2,olpc"
    
  1. From Sugar-Control Panel, select Arabic (Algeria)
  1. Restart sugar
  1. Verify the following
    • There are only Latin and Arabic glyphs on the UI (no funny looking boxes, and no stars enclosed by circles)
    • Typing of Arabic numerals works as per the layout at http://wiki.laptop.org/go/OLPC_Arabic_Keyboard
    • Latin text, while being typed should not come up as ugly looking Italic Comic Sans like fonts
    • The keyboard test mentioned above should be carried out in the Sugar mesh search bar and in Write with
      • The Mothanna font selected
      • The Thabit font selected

comment:19 Changed 6 years ago by sayamindu

  • Action Needed changed from test in build to approve for release

Just tested in a pristine installation of joyride-2483. Works fine except for some occurrence of #2207

Please approve for release.

comment:20 Changed 6 years ago by mstone

  • Action Needed changed from approve for release to add to release

Approved, thanks for the testcase!

comment:21 Changed 6 years ago by cscott

  • Action Needed changed from add to release to test in release

Packages added to stable repository in commit afc4c3b2 for build 764. Please confirm the package versions are correct and test in stable build 764 or later.

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.