# Expanded NATO symbol options **URL:** \ **Category:** Feature Requests\ **Created:** [January 9, 2009, 2:28am UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449 "2009-01-09T02:28:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 14\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/mkiefte/32/25_2.png) [@mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/mkiefte)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 11:25pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/41 "2009-01-11T23:25:09Z")
> [@](#): > > What I’m talking about is in the context of using the same font—as in, > bitwise identical—on different platforms. One way to do that is to ship > the font inside the module. I think that’s a great idea. I’ve avoided font-specific labels for that very reason, opting instead for bazillions of layers. However, try to find a font that’s completely free AND the one you want. - m. Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_M](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/tim_m/32/2_2.png) [@Tim\_M](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Tim_M)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 11:30pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/42 "2009-01-11T23:30:51Z")
Exactly why I have 100’s of layers too. Without a more robust Text label trait and font capability I think module sizes will continue to increase in size graphically to get around this issue From: [messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org) [[mailto:messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org)] On Behalf Of Michael Kiefte Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 5:25 PM To: VASSAL Engine Forums Mailing List Subject: Re: [Feature Requests]Re: Expanded NATO symbol options > [@](#): > > What I’m talking about is in the context of using the same font—as in, > bitwise identical—on different platforms. One way to do that is to ship > the font inside the module. I think that’s a great idea. I’ve avoided font-specific labels for that very reason, opting instead for bazillions of layers. However, try to find a font that’s completely free AND the one you want. - m. Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/brent_easton/32/10_2.png) [@Brent\_Easton](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Brent_Easton)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 11:34pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/43 "2009-01-11T23:34:28Z")
Tim, > [@](#): > > Exactly why I have 100’s of layers too. Without a more robust Text label > trait and font capability I think module sizes will continue to increase > in size graphically to get around this issue Michael makes an important point though. Tim, do you have permission to redistribute the font you are using in these 100’s of layers? B. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/mkiefte/32/25_2.png) [@mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/mkiefte)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 11:40pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/44 "2009-01-11T23:40:17Z")
I still think it’s easy enough to package fonts with modules. A whole TTF file appears to be only about 200 kB which is the size of a smallish image or a very large counter. Back to the original issue of NATO symbols, I suspect a NATO font is overkill, but there’s no reason to exclude the possibility. I just think that SVG images would end up having the same effect, but would otherwise be easier for module designers to expand on. - M. 2009/1/11 Tim McCaron \<[timothy.mccarron@sbcglobal.net](mailto:timothy.mccarron@sbcglobal.net) ([timothy.mccarron@sbcglobal.net](mailto:timothy.mccarron@sbcglobal.net))\> > [@](#): > > Exactly why I have 100’s of layers too. Without a more robust Text label trait and font capability I think module sizes will continue to increase in size graphically to get around this issue > > From: [messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org) ([messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org)) [[mailto:messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org) ([messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:messages-bounces@forums.vassalengine.org))] On Behalf Of Michael Kiefte > Sent: Sunday, January 11, 2009 5:25 PM > To: VASSAL Engine Forums Mailing List > Subject: Re: [Feature Requests]Re: Expanded NATO symbol options > > > [@](#): > > > > What I’m talking about is in the context of using the same font—as in, > > > > bitwise identical—on different platforms. One way to do that is to ship > > the font inside the module. > > I think that’s a great idea. I’ve avoided font-specific labels for that very reason, opting instead for bazillions of layers. > > However, try to find a font that’s completely free AND the one you want. > > - m. Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_M](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/tim_m/32/2_2.png) [@Tim\_M](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/Tim_M)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 11:44pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/45 "2009-01-11T23:44:12Z")
I see the conumdrum your getting at. If you give the ability to package fonts within the module, you lose control of keeping things kosher/legal as someone is bound to come along somewhere and embed a font that is not supposed to be redistributed I really don’t have an answer how to avoid that, unless there is a way for Vassal to dissolve itself from liability if someone does do something they are not supposed to and put the onus on them directly Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/mkiefte/32/25_2.png) [@mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/mkiefte)\ **Post date:** [January 11, 2009, 11:56pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/46 "2009-01-11T23:56:22Z")
> [@](#): > > I really don’t have an answer how to avoid that, unless there is a way for > Vassal to dissolve itself from liability if someone does do something they > are not supposed to and put the onus on them directly We just pull modules when asked or when it’s obvious. Users could just as easily include nonfree images or sounds. - M. Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 3:29pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/47 "2009-01-12T15:29:14Z")
Thus spake “Tim McCaron”: > [@](#): > > I see the conumdrum your getting at. > If you give the ability to package fonts within the module, you lose control > of keeping things kosher/legal as someone is bound to come along somewhere > and embed a font that is not supposed to be redistributed > > I really don’t have an answer how to avoid that, unless there is a way for > Vassal to dissolve itself from liability if someone does do something they > are not supposed to and put the onus on them directly The situation with distribution rights for fonts is not qualitatively different from the situation with images. However, unlike with images, we have the possibility of providing for the module designer a package of freely-distributable fonts which is likely to contain fonts suitable for most counter graphics. I have close to 200 fonts on my Fedora 10 system (which is only a fraction of the total number I could have installed), many of which are high-quality and all of which are under some sort of free license. I think it would be possible to assemble a representative sample of these which would statisfy nearly all module designers. What’s needed, at minimum, are: - A family of serif fonts. - A family of sans fonts. - A family of typewriter fonts. - A set of fonts legible at very small sizes. The small fonts are easiest to cover: The artwiz fonts are perfect for the job. ([artwizaleczapka.sourceforge.net/](http://artwizaleczapka.sourceforge.net/), GPLv2) For the others, the Liberation fonts provide size-equivalent replacements for Courier New, Arial, and Times New Roman, and so would be good choices. Probably it would be nice to have more than one family for each of these, because fonts with a different aspect ratio might be desired. Others which are good quality and visually distinct from the Liberation fonts are the DejaVu fonts (based on the Bitstream Vera fonts). The Lucida fonts are distributed with Java, so we can rely on those being present everywhere. All 35 standard PostScript fonts are available in GPL versions. If we bundled these with VASSAL, I suspect that almost all module designers would find suitable fonts among them, and so few modules would even need to bundle their own fonts. (There is a subtext here: All of these fonts are GPL. We could bundle them with VASSAL if we were GPL ourselves…) I’m not sure if we should provide a Fraktur font (the typeface found in German-language books until the end of WWII) as I don’t think we should encourage people to use it on, well, anything. (Ever tried to read the names of German ships in any of the Great War at Sea games? Gah!!!) – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/mkiefte/32/25_2.png) [@mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/mkiefte)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 4:03pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/48 "2009-01-12T16:03:30Z")
> [@](#): > > (There is a subtext here: All of these fonts are GPL. We could bundle them > with VASSAL if we were GPL ourselves…) We’re not GPL? > [@](#): > > I’m not sure if we should provide a Fraktur font (the typeface found in > German-language books until the end of WWII) as I don’t think we should > encourage people to use it on, well, anything. (Ever tried to read the names > of German ships in any of the Great War at Sea games? Gah!!!) And a faux cyrillic. There’s no accounting for taste. ☹ - M. Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 5:02pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/49 "2009-01-12T17:02:21Z")
Thus spake “Michael Kiefte”: > [@](#): > > > [@](#): > > > > (There is a subtext here: All of these fonts are GPL. We could bundle them > > with VASSAL if we were GPL ourselves…) > > We’re not GPL? No. We’re LGPL. The only substantive difference between the two (other than the code reuse issue) is that the LGPL permits linking from code with a different license. I think that the sole effect this provision has on us is w/r/t modules which are bundled with their own copy VASSAL, becuase they constitute a work which links against VASSAL. If VASSAL were GPL, then those modules would be forced to be licensed under the GPL as well. This provision—in fact, none of the provision in the LGPL or GPL—have any impact on modules which are not bundled with their own copy of VASSAL. So, I don’t see any downside for us to being GPL. The additional thing which the LGPL permits is something which nobody benefits from, and the things which the GPL permits that we can’t do with the LGPL would be beneficial for us. (Furthermore, switching to the GPL could be done with a few minutes of work and a Perl script, since the LGPL permits relicensing under the GPL without requiring explicit consent of the copyright holders.) – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/mkiefte/32/25_2.png) [@mkiefte](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/mkiefte)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 6:40pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/50 "2009-01-12T18:40:52Z")
> [@](#): > > So, I don’t see any downside for us to being GPL. The additional thing which > the LGPL permits is something which nobody benefits from, I don’t think that’s true. There are some commercial modules that bundle VASSAL. I think it would have been a good idea to have been GPL from the very start, but to switch to GPL now in order to prevent this may not be such a hot idea. I’m not really against that kind of use. Until now, it never occurred to me how this was possible until you mentioned the LGPL. I honestly never noticed before. - M. > [@](#): > > and the things > which the GPL permits that we can’t do with the LGPL would be beneficial for > us. (Furthermore, switching to the GPL could be done with a few minutes of > work and a Perl script, since the LGPL permits relicensing under the GPL > without requiring explicit consent of the copyright holders.) > > – > J. Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![bartleby](https://forum.vassalengine.org/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/bc8723/32.png) [@bartleby](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/bartleby)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 7:07pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/51 "2009-01-12T19:07:31Z")
> [@uckelman](#): > > I’m not sure if we should provide a Fraktur font (the typeface found in > German-language books until the end of WWII) as I don’t think we should > encourage people to use it on, well, anything. (Ever tried to read the names > of German ships in any of the Great War at Sea games? Gah!!!) It could be worse. They could have used Sütterlin! 😛 ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 7:58pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/52 "2009-01-12T19:58:50Z")
Thus spake “Michael Kiefte”: > [@](#): > > I don’t think that’s true. There are some commercial modules that bundle > VASSAL. I think it would have been a good idea to have been GPL from the > very start, but to switch to GPL now in order to prevent this may not be > such a hot idea. I’m not really against that kind of use. I’m not against commercial modules. I think there should be a way of packaging them so that they don’t need their own copy of VASSAL bundled with them, so that our choice of license is not dictated by this practice. Otherwise it pretty much blocks our ability to distribute a font package, and I’m not at all interested in maintaining two separate versions of VASSAL, with one containing no GPL’d components just for the benefit of the handful of commercial module makers—that would pretty much negates the benefit we’d get from using the GPL. – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/uckelman/32/10020_2.png) [@uckelman](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/uckelman)\ **Post date:** [January 12, 2009, 8:01pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/53 "2009-01-12T20:01:50Z")
Thus spake “bartleby”: > [@](#): > > It could be worse. They could have used Sütterlin! 😛 That’s the script my grandfather wrote in. Not easy reading, for sure. – J. * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) ---
**Author:** ![tar](https://forum.vassalengine.org/user_avatar/forum.vassalengine.org/tar/32/21_2.png) [@tar](https://forum.vassalengine.org/u/tar)\ **Post date:** [January 13, 2009, 10:21pm UTC](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449/54 "2009-01-13T22:21:52Z")
On Jan 12, 2009, at 7:29 AM, Joel Uckelman wrote: > [@](#): > > What’s needed, at minimum, are: > > - A family of serif fonts. > - A family of sans fonts. > - A family of typewriter fonts. > - A set of fonts legible at very small sizes. And as supplemental: - A symbol font - One or more dingbats type font * * * Messages mailing list [Messages@forums.vassalengine.org](mailto:Messages@forums.vassalengine.org) [forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org](http://forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/listinfo/messages_forums.vassalengine.org) Post generated using Mail2Forum ([mail2forum.com](http://www.mail2forum.com)) [Previous page](https://forum.vassalengine.org/t/expanded-nato-symbol-options/1449.md?page=2)