Bug 511298

Summary:	The bold and italic versions of the STIX fonts cannot be found
Product:	[Fedora] Fedora	Reporter:	Jim Radford <radford>
Component:	stix-fonts	Assignee:	Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot>
Status:	CLOSED NOTABUG	QA Contact:	Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	low
Version:	11	CC:	fonts-bugs, nicolas.mailhot
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	All
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2009-07-14 19:44:24 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Jim Radford 2009-07-14 16:18:19 UTC

The bold and italic versions of the STIX fonts don't show up in Firefox.

Take a look at this page.

  http://www.stixfonts.org/allGlyphs.html

Notice that characters like GREEK CAPITAL LETTER PI appear four times.  Each should look different: regular, bold, italic, bold-italic, but they don't.

I'm guessing this is because the STIXGeneral-Bold, STIXGeneral-BoldItalic, and STIXGeneral-Italic otf files are not mentioned in the conf files, only STIXGeneral is.

Here are the relevant CSS rules.

  span.STIXGeneral {font-family: STIXGeneral;}
  span.STIXGeneral-Bold {font-family: STIXGeneral-Bold;}
  span.STIXGeneral-BoldItalic {font-family: STIXGeneral-BoldItalic;}
  span.STIXGeneral-Italic {font-family: STIXGeneral-Italic;}

Comment 1 Nicolas Mailhot 2009-07-14 17:27:51 UTC

We don't modify Stix at all, and we're not likely to change such a monster font any time soon, please report any bug you find with Stix upstream

It's development is unfortunately black-box cathedral we don't have any visibility on

Comment 2 Jim Radford 2009-07-14 18:15:35 UTC

The problems is *not* with the font.  You can view the mentioned characters in the bold version of the font just fine if you open the font file directly.  The problem is that firefox can't find the bold version when its referenced by name.  

I notice that the conf file (stix-fonts-fontconfig.conf) doesn't mention STIXGeneral-Bold, only STIXGeneral.  I suspect that omission is causing the problem.

Who created the conf files that are part stix-fonts srpm?

Comment 3 Nicolas Mailhot 2009-07-14 19:44:24 UTC

(In reply to comment #2)

> I notice that the conf file (stix-fonts-fontconfig.conf) doesn't mention
> STIXGeneral-Bold, only STIXGeneral.  

This name is not exported by Stix files on *nix fontconfig systems. You could argue fontconfig should recognize it as it's one of the legacy names in the font metadata, but at the same time if fontconfig exported all the layers of font legacy metadata junk instead of just the most modern metadata apps would have a difficult time coping.

The CSS is wrong if it references a legacy name, I don't think any modern OS will display STIXGeneral-Bold for the Bold version of STIXGeneral

> I suspect that omission is causing the problem.
> 
> Who created the conf files that are part stix-fonts srpm?  

You suspect wrong, our fontconfig files can help fontconfig find a font it wouldn't have otherwise but never to remove access to a font which is referenced directly

Anyway, not a bug in the font package. All the data is there. Feel free to bug the fontconfig or firefox maintainers if you want legacy naming access enabled

Comment 4 Jim Radford 2009-07-14 20:15:26 UTC

(In reply to comment #3)
> The CSS is wrong if it references a legacy name

I didn't see that it was a legacy name.  Firefox can find the bold versions of letters when they are in a <b> as expected, so you are right, there is no pressing need for supporting the legacy name.