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.
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
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] 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
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.
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
Tim,
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
forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
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.
2009/1/11 Tim McCaron <timothy.mccarron@sbcglobal.net (timothy.mccarron@sbcglobal.net)>
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
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)
We just pull modules when asked or when it’s obvious. Users could just as easily include nonfree images or sounds.
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
Thus spake “Tim McCaron”:
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:
The small fonts are easiest to cover: The artwiz fonts are perfect for
the job. (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
forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
We’re not GPL?
And a faux cyrillic. There’s no accounting for taste. 
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
Thus spake “Michael Kiefte”:
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
forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
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.
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
It could be worse. They could have used Sütterlin! 
Thus spake “Michael Kiefte”:
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
forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
Thus spake “bartleby”:
That’s the script my grandfather wrote in. Not easy reading, for sure.
–
J.
Messages mailing list
Messages@forums.vassalengine.org
forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)
On Jan 12, 2009, at 7:29 AM, Joel Uckelman wrote:
And as supplemental:
Messages mailing list
Messages@forums.vassalengine.org
forums.vassalengine.org/mailman/ … engine.org
Post generated using Mail2Forum (mail2forum.com)