пн, 8 мар. 2021 г. в 02:27, Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>:

> Evgeny Zajcev <lg.zevlg@gmail.com> writes:
>
> >> The reason nearest was chosen was because scaled up pixel art (emojis,
> >> mostly, like etc/images/smilies/wry.xpm) looked abominable
>
> Doesn't it seem like a bad trade-off to improve rendering of smileys at
> the cost of rendering PDF:s worse?  I rarely if ever use doc-view, but
> testing it now seems to produce less than stellar results (i.e. the text
> is barely readable).
>
> > Just get rid of any xpm :) Emacs has nice support for SVG after all, we
> can
> > write xpm to svg converter to keep pixel art precision.
>
> Is there a way to convert from XPM automatically, or are you saying you
> volunteer to make the SVG:s?
>

I can write the converter of course, however, there are already fonts with
colored emojis with "SIL Open Font License" that might be used to get SVG
emojis.  Is that license suitable?  Or keeping pixel art for old xpm's is
crucial?

Nowadays having emojis is easy as evaluating (set-fontset-font t 'symbol
(font-spec :family "<font family with emojis>")) sexp, probably old
packages (that uses emoji xpms) could be updated to use unicode emojis
instead?


> Another option would perhaps be to just replace the XPM:s we have with
> some set of emojis licensed under Creative Commons.  The first one I
> found when searching online was this one:
>
>     https://openmoji.org/
>     https://github.com/hfg-gmuend/openmoji/blob/master/FAQ.md
>
> Its license is Creative Commons Share Alike License 4.0 (CC BY-SA 4.0).
> That is okay for distributing with Emacs, I think?
>
> Or we could use some other set, I don't exactly care which one it is.
> If there is more than one candidate perhaps we could distribute more
> than one and add an option to choose between them.
>


-- 
lg