Commons talk:Stroke Order Project/Fonts

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Japanese Kanji[edit]

“There are several nuanced differences between Kanji and traditional Chinese glyphs that makes it easy to mix up one's fonts. The grass-crown, for example, has three strokes in modern Japanese glyphs but four in traditional Chinese.”

That's why I was suggesting using the HDZB_7.ttf font. The other two don't have the same stroke orders, however, so far in comparison, this one does! Edit: Also, 廿's glyphs may have three visible strokes, however, it is still written with four strokes in modern Japanese (see wwwjdic) Also used like that in compounds 靴 etc. So it would not be inherently wrong to use the Chinese font that displays it with four strokes. It might actually even help a learner, don't you think? --Tauwasser (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

See a quick Comparison of the three fonts. This is why I wanted to have it included in the first place, since it was not included before.

Also, I'm not saying we should use it for all Japanese characters. Basically, just the ones that differ in Simplified Chinese (the other fonts) would have to be set in this font. This would also help with having a consistent style as HDBZ_7.ttf is somewhat different... --Tauwasser (talk) 12:04, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Also, I looked at all the other fonts User:Swift linked to, and the best I could find are ReikoFont れいこフォント and habataki font はばたきフォント (former Siusendo font 鞦韆堂フォント). Of these, habataki fits into the current style, however, it has some misleading strokes. --Tauwasser (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

[Sorry, but I think I misunderstood some of the above. Could you clarify a few points, please?]
I'll try to get around to installing the HDZB fonts in the next few days.
"The other two don't have the same stroke orders, however, so far in comparison, this one does!" Which one is "this one"? HDZB_7? What is it that "this one" has? "the same stroke order"? The same as what?
Are you saying that the HDZB_7 font has Japanese glyphs? That would be a nice break. --Swift (talk) 14:57, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Yep, sorry about the wording, I meant HDBZ_7.ttf. It's probably not exactly Japanese glyphs insomuch that they were intendet for Japanese, but they still match up in my opinion (see the comparison screenshot above, the leftmost is HDBZ_7.ttf). However, I really feel that for 直 HDBZ_7.ttf would work and for 廿 either of the other two (HDBZ_74.ttf, HDBZ_36.ttf) would work better, as the Japanese stroke order does feature 4 strokes (in composite as well), so a visible fourth stroke (though not usually seen in Japanese fonts) might actually help the understanding of the stroke order! --Tauwasser (talk) 15:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Another font I found[edit]

Hi, so I found this font, AR PL UKai. It's also a KaiTi style font and matches the other font perfectly and does contain traditional glyphs that are at least usable for Japanese. Also, it does contain some variants on Bopomofo as well! It is still in production and seems to be fairly active (for an open KDE project anyway!). The license also seems to match the criteria to be used on Commons. Please comment. --Tauwasser (talk) 18:50, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Great news! I'll try to get around to installing it and having a look. Sorry, I'm a bit swamped right now. --Swift (talk) 15:51, 9 February 2009 (UTC)