https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=146291
--- Comment #11 from Eyal Rozenberg <eyalr...@gmx.com> --- (In reply to Mike Kaganski from comment #9) > So I suggest, if this is to be implemented, to only include those missing > fonts, that have either user-defined explicit substitution entries, or > built-in substitution rules > > That way, user would see those fonts that are known to provide compatible > text layout (built-in case), or at least user-defined substitution tells > that the user knows what they do. That's reasonable, I guess. > like those known metrically compatible pairs. Ah, so, if we made that restriction that means effectively not having this feature at all, since almost no fonts have metrically-compatible substitutions. So, let's trust the choice of whoever defined the substitutions. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
