Re: Allegedly "open source" fonts and the DFSG

> Really? How, for example, do I generate the source code for the fpgm or
prep programs contained in the Droid Sans Mono binary?

Those are basically assembly programs, with 1:1 mapping to mnemonics.

https://github.com/felipesanches/Hinting_Decompiler


Em sáb., 10 de ago. de 2024 às 16:39, Felipe Sanches <[email protected]>
escreveu:

> If you prove me wrong I'll be happy to help you demand proper sources. But
> I haven't yet seen any need for that.
>
> Em sáb., 10 de ago. de 2024 às 16:37, Felipe Sanches <[email protected]>
> escreveu:
>
>> The OpenType spec and its binary format encoding is, afaik, precisely 1
>> to 1. There's not much magic (or optimization) left to be done. If you have
>> the binary you effectively have the sources.
>>
>> Em sáb., 10 de ago. de 2024 às 15:39, Pip Cet <[email protected]>
>> escreveu:
>>
>>> "Felipe Sanches" <[email protected]> writes:
>>>
>>> > As far as I can tell, the OpenType binaries have data structures that
>>> > map 1:1 to their source project files,
>>>
>>> I don't believe that is true at all! I'm not quite sure what you mean by
>>> "source project files", to be honest. This is not about converting Type
>>> 1 or TrueType to OpenType: it's about whether any of these formats can
>>> reasonably be considered source code, i.e. the preferred form for
>>> editing the program.
>>>
>>> > so it is trivial to regenerate the sources from the binaries.
>>>
>>> Really? How, for example, do I generate the source code for the fpgm or
>>> prep programs contained in the Droid Sans Mono binary?
>>>
>>> I don't think it's trivial at all.  It involves decompilation, just like
>>> any other compiled binary program without its source code available.
>>>
>>> > If there's any specific case in which this is not true, I'd be glad to
>>> learn about.
>>>
>>> See the examples. The case of Noto Color Emoji is particularly clear,
>>> since it is the repository itself that explains how to build the SVGs
>>> from the "original Ai artwork" (their words, not mine) after,
>>> presumably, editing said original artwork files. I don't know whether
>>> those files contain additional valuable information beyond what is
>>> available in the SVGs, perhaps comments or a modification history, but I
>>> believe they do.
>>>
>>> > Given that, I think the lack of sources in this case is OK, because it
>>> is trivial to recompute them.
>>>
>>> I must insist it is not. But that's not sufficient, anyway: a
>>> hand-written assembly program may be entirely re-derivable from its
>>> assembled form, assuming there are no comments or non-standard
>>> instruction mnemonics, but that doesn't make the binary the source code,
>>> because no programmer would edit the binary directly rather than
>>> reassembling it from a text file.
>>>
>>> > Let me know if you have additional information.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what information you require. Please let me know.
>>>
>>> Pip
>>>
>>>