Multicolored fonts in PM?

[Omitooshi]

EDIT: Multicolored fonts.
test page. You need to set the options.
http://people.mozilla.org/~jkew/opentyp ... i-old.html
(don't try to open the new version in Firefox. Your system will almost freeze, at least in Linux.)
EDIT:

Currently, Android, ChromeOS, Chrome Linux, as well as certain versions
of Firefox support rendering fonts built using this format.

https://github.com/googlei18n/color-emoji

O_O PM support multicolored fonts???
a test page?

SVG in open type?
http://www.w3.org/2013/10/SVG_in_OpenType/

or the other Microsoft "standard"
http://www.istartedsomething.com/201306 ... -standard/

PM support any of these??? It was 2013.
(certainly nor the m$ one)

EDIT: colored>multicolored

[Moonchild]

Pale Moon has some support for SVG-in-OpenType, but.. apparently it's a Mozilla-specific non-standard implementation not to spec. *sigh*

I've opened an issue to align it with the spec. Obviously not in wide use because it's taken 2 years for me to be even aware of it ;P

[Omitooshi]

Wait, you mean you just discovered this and are as clueless as me?

[Moonchild]

Wait, you mean you just discovered this and are as clueless as me?

I wasn't aware of this until you posted about it.

As an aside: Fonts are fonts; their color should be determined by formatting, not inherent to it, IMHO.

[Omitooshi]

As an aside: Fonts are fonts; their color should be determined by formatting, not inherent to it, IMHO.

Are you sure you got it? I really meant multicolored(edited the OP).
Say, something like this.
http://fluentfocus.com/wp-content/uploa ... INAL-2.png

[Moonchild]

Yes, I'm aware of it, and i know exactly what you mean and what this proposal is about.

But my approach is: Fonts are fonts. Their color should be determined by font formatting, not the font itself. Fonts are made up of glyphs. Glyphs are, by definition and purpose, monochrome. If you want to use vector fonts in multiple colors, then what you want is a vector image format.

[Omitooshi]

I don't agree, they are plenty of legitimate reasons to do it that way. But that's not important, because standards are standards .

These fonts, will work in the interface of PM too right?

I guess you plan on porting it from FF. Take note that it's a bit buggy. In the test page, one of my cores shout at 100% and the whole system became veeeeery sluggish. The bouncing footballs also had excessive CPU usage but still bearable. (Linux mint 17.2 KDE)

Also, the bitmap ones, are also working?(they are in the standard too ) I couldn't find a test page for them. Firefox should support them already.

You can ignore the m$ "standard" XD .

[Moonchild]

You're talking about animated SVG that is handled as a font glyph, I gather...
I can see that potentially being disastrous for performance due to invalidations and repaints. I'm not sure if I'll add animation support - sounds like a can of worms.

Converting the Mozilla "spec" to the unified spec isn't too difficult so I'll align it in Goanna. Working on it, probably done in a couple days.

[Moonchild]

I don't agree, they are plenty of legitimate reasons to do it that way.

There are plenty of thinkable use cases where multi-colored fonts (where each glyph is used as an image, rather than a glyph) would come in useful, but that doesn't mean that you can just redefine the terms font, typeface and glyph to suit your (decorative) needs

But that's not important, because standards are standards .

Let me just clarify one thing here:
This is not a standard. At most it's a "nice gimmick to have". It is posted as a "community specification".

http://www.w3.org/2013/10/SVG_in_OpenType/

Status of This Document

This specification was published by the SVG Glyphs for OpenType Community Group. It is not a W3C Standard nor is it on the W3C Standards Track.

As such I'll be looking at at least bringing the implementation across from a Mozilla-specific one to a unified one, but it will still be experimental and no promises are made that it will be maintained, improved or even kept.

[Omitooshi]

"but that doesn't mean that you can just redefine the terms font, typeface and glyph to suit your (decorative) needs "
Yea, and airplanes don't fly, because they don't flap their wings.

"This is not a standard."
Crap. It will take years to see which standard will take over.
They are at least 4 right now( apple, m$, Google, Firefox/adobe).
Every pirate votes for himself

[Moonchild]

You know, if you're just going to mock me, then I'll happily drop this whole "nice to have" in the rubbish bin.

[KNTRO]

Gentlemen,

Hey! I'm not sure how related it is to what you're talking, but, take a look at these emojis, please:

In Pale Moon:

In Firefox:

Will these color emojis be implemented in Pale Moon's future releases?

Best regards.

[Moonchild]

Pale Moon 26 will have support for this when you switch on "svg in opentype" since we've completed static support for it. It's not enabled by default because there are a few snags (most notably, some text may not show up properly or at all, especially if they try to use animated images as glyphs (such nonsense anyway)). So it's there if you really want it, but at your own peril

[KNTRO]

Thank you for your cordial response.

I will ask you how to enable this once Pale Moon 26 be released. If I find it too snaggy, I will disabled it back.