I can't recall the exact ins and outs of the debate now, but I do know this was discussed around the table here with the Phil, Alex, Gerry etc (one of the few times we were physically in the same location) and that Neil's suggested solution (i.e. 1st message in the bug report) was the preferred conclusion at the time.
This still stops the Arial missing message appearing (except when it's used and really missing). So is there a downside with this solution?
From: owner-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on behalf of Alex Bligh
Sent: Thu 27/07/2006 10:27 AM
Cc: Alex Bligh
Subject: Re: [XaraXtreme-dev] Current/default font
Martin Wuerthner wrote:
> I would finally like to fix the default/current font issue for the 0.7
> release. See http://bugzilla.xara.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1111
> Are there any objections to the strategy described there? Changing the
> current font to whatever the host system thinks is closest to Arial
> would finally stop "Arial (missing)" from being shown initially in the
> text tool on systems without Arial. Charles, ISTR that when I first
> suggested this change a long time ago you were not too happy with it
> and even thought it was even a good thing for users to see the "Arial
> missing" font name?
> The consequences of the current font being different from the default
> font are that even when the user never changes font and just clicks
> and types, each text object will get its own typeface attribute
> stating the font that is used - which is a good thing because the
> document might later be loaded on a different machine that has both
> Arial and the font used in the document, and then, we certainly do
> want the same font to be used that was used when creating the
Yes. I prefer the strategy described by Neil in the original bug