the fontSizes

[Richmond]

On 23/05/15 22:55, Paul Dupuis wrote:
> On 5/23/2015 2:43 PM, Richmond wrote:
>> On 23/05/15 18:32, Bob Cole wrote:
>>> put the fontSizes of "Arial" into message box
>> Over here in the "Happy World of Linux" (Xubuntu 15.04):
>>
>> 1. "put the fontSizes of "Arial" into message box"
>>
>> results in nothing at all, whether 6.7.5 or 7.0.5, probably because
>> there is no "Arial" font on my machine.
>>
>> 2. "put the fontSizes of "Caladea" into message box" [ a font which
>> Libre Office 'sees' on my system. ]
>>
>> results in nothing at all either.
>>
>> 3. "put the fontSizes of "UnDotum" into message box" [ a font which
>> shows up when I do a 'put the fontNames' exercise ]
>>
>> results in a "0" in both 6.7.5 and 7.0.5
>>
>> Sorry, not much help.
>>
>> Even tho' the documentation sez 'fontSizes' is good for Linux as well
>> as Macintosh.
> An empty result is the expected result for any font name passed to the
> function that is not among the list of fonts returned by "the fontNames"
> 0 is the expected result for any scalable font (among the list of fonts
> provided by "the fontNames") since such fonts can be scaled to any size.
> The fontSizes function is ONLY relevant for old fashion bitmapped fonts,
> and while they are still out there and people still use them, 99% of all
> fonts these days are scalable (Truetype, Postscript, etc.)
>
> I would say this function is a left over from support of Classic MacOS
> days and should be considered deprecated, but someone on the list will
> undoubtedly respond that they have an app in current use that still uses
> bitmapped fonts.
>
>
I really don't understand that as I was designing scalable fonts in 1994 
with Fontographer
for use on Mac OS 7.1.

I looked at bitmapped fonts and wondered why one would still bother with 
them (20 years ago!)
when, already, so many truetype fonts were readily available.

Richmond.