Save As a Package and exclude individual fonts. (Split discussion)

[William Overington]

_____________________________________________________
MOD EDIT -
This thread has been split from the following post: 

_____________________________________________________

On 3/6/2022 at 11:14 AM, Alfred said:

TL;DR

Well that is a matter for you to think about. The gentleman, who is an expert in font formats, provided an extremely helpful reply.

I consider the reply to be well-worth reading and the links provided in the reply to be well-worth following.

William

 

 

[Alfred]

2 hours ago, William Overington said:

Well that is a matter for you to think about. The gentleman, who is an expert in font formats, provided an extremely helpful reply.

I consider the reply to be well-worth reading and the links provided in the reply to be well-worth following.

I’m afraid you misinterpreted my “TL;DR”, William. All I meant is that for anyone who doesn’t want to spend time following a chain of three links, the main point is that (because of the variation in use cases) it’s rare for the licence info to be included in the font file instead of being provided separately.

[Old Bruce]

5 hours ago, William Overington said:

Well that is a matter for you to think about. The gentleman, who is an expert in font formats, provided an extremely helpful reply.

I consider the reply to be well-worth reading and the links provided in the reply to be well-worth following.

Sometimes the term TL;DR is used before giving a brief summation of the text. This is provided for people who do not want to read a long piece of text. Also used in conjunction with text that is hard to find on a website/webpage or is scattered in a very long document.

[William Overington]

4 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

Sometimes the term TL;DR is used before giving a brief summation of the text. This is provided for people who do not want to read a long piece of text. Also used in conjunction with text that is hard to find on a website/webpage or is scattered in a very long document.

Thank you for that.

Previously to seeing it used in this thread, I had formed the idea that people who use the TL:DR thing tend to be the people who are unwilling to consider something and just dismiss an idea with a wave of the hand.

In fact, the thread to which I linked has three posts. The middle one includes helpful comments and two helpful links, which were provided by an expert who had kindly responded to my enquiry. None of the posts is very long, one is fairly short.

I consider that using the TL:DR thing like that was, in the circumstances, offensive and unneceaary.

A post saying "My précis of the thread is as follows" would be acceptable.

But it is sometimes like when some journalists on television give their summary of what someone has been saying in an interview that has just finished.

There is no guarantee that someone's précis of a document wriiten by someone else encapsulates the essence and the nuance of the original.

William

 

[Alfred]

26 minutes ago, William Overington said:

I consider that using the TL:DR thing like that was, in the circumstances, offensive and unneceaary.

A post saying "My précis of the thread is as follows" would be acceptable.

As I tried to explain in my previous post, William, my “TL;DR” was intended to indicate such a précis. I’m disappointed that you should have entertained the notion of my being deliberately offensive.

[William Overington]

20 minutes ago, Alfred said:

As I tried to explain in my previous post, William, my “TL;DR” was intended to indicate such a précis. I’m disappointed that you should have entertained the notion of my being deliberately offensive.

Well, the post had TL:DR.

So we are both disappointed.

I did not use the word 'deliberately'.

However, if you choose to edit your post and instead of TL:DR perhaps use the term précis, with or without the accent on the 'e' as you choose, then I will edit my posts so that the paysage becomes delightful. 

William

 

 

[kenmcd]

8 hours ago, William Overington said:

I consider that using the TL:DR thing like that was, in the circumstances, offensive and unneceaary.

OMG. Get over yourself.
The only thing in that link which was not already discussed above is what he posted.
The rest of it was a useless exercise and a waste of time.
I know you like to run on and on and on and on and on about irrelevant minutia,
but not everyone finds this as fascinating, or as useful.

Your "offense" is silly and extremely petty. 

[Old Bruce]

3 hours ago, William Overington said:

Previously to seeing it used in this thread, I had formed the idea that people who use the TL:DR thing tend to be the people who are unwilling to consider something and just dismiss an idea with a wave of the hand.

It may be used to indicate that the length of the item would require a commitment of time. And the person may not have the time.

I cannot recall how many times I had come across this oddball little initialism before I twigged to its actual meaning, Too Long; Didn't Read. Then I had to winkle out the multiple reasons people use it. Yes in this case precis would have been a better term, but one that is perhaps as obscure (or archaic) to many as the TL;DR is. 

Like the confusion about whether it is Laugh Out Loud or Lots Of Love.

[William Overington]

8 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

Yes in this case precis would have been a better term, but one that is perhaps as obscure (or archaic) to many as the TL;DR is. 

I have known the word précis since the 1960s. The word was in everyday use in that there was a qualification known as "O" Level English Language, which was typically taken at thre age of 16. Evidence of at least five passes at "O" Level were a necessary part of being able to enter higher education, these five had to be English Language, Mathematics, a science subject, a foreign language (typically, though not necessarily, French), one other, possibly, if I remember correctly, referred to as "a humanity" (typically history or geography). The examination for "O" Level English Language included producing a précis of no more than one hundred words from a previously unseen longer text presented in the examination paper, the précis needing to include all the matters mentioned in the text that had been provided. A typical homework before taking the examination would be to produce a précis from a provided text. The examination also included other parts, such as writing an essay.

William

 

 

[Old Bruce]

6 hours ago, William Overington said:

 "O" Level English

Doesn't mean a thing here. Not now and not ever.

[garrettm30]

Wow, what a turn this thread has taken! I might as well throw myself into it, why not?

As a native English speaker who speaks French as a second language, I did recognize the word précis from French, but it so happens that I was entirely unfamiliar with it as an English term. The “TL;DR” label, on the other hand, made sense to me. Perhaps this goes with the territory: talking about software on an Internet forum is more in the technical realm, and the latter term is more likely to be recognized. Perhaps the former would be more recognized in academic circles (I do not know).

As a practical matter: I do not have any personal interest in the request of this thread, but I do like to see what my fellow forum members are interested in, and as such I do try read even those threads that don’t involve me directly. In such a circumstance, Alfred’s “TL;DR” was quite helpful: it would not be a good use of my time to chase down extra links for things that don’t concern me, so otherwise I would have just skipped them, but thanks to the summary Alfred gave, I was able to glean the key points and follow the conversation, and I did appreciate that he did that.

In any case, I see no reason at all why Alfred should edit his “TL;DR,” especially now that if anyone has any doubts at all at what he meant, one needs only read on a few more posts where it is made abundantly clear.

[garrettm30]

8 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:

Doesn't mean a thing here. Not now and not ever.

Yeah, I was confused about that too. I just guessed that maybe it was a certain type of educational requirement different from what we have in my own country (U.S.A.).

As for William’s example of the word, to me it looks like what one would describe as an “abstract” in research papers.

Edited March 7, 2022 by garrettm30
Fixed a badly flowing sentence

[Alfred]

13 hours ago, Old Bruce said:

It may be used to indicate that the length of the item would require a commitment of time. And the person may not have the time.

Exactly this. It’s nothing to do with being dismissive but everything to do with being unwilling or unable to make a commitment to spending the required amount of time, so I thought it might be helpful if I restated the main point here. Since I wasn’t aiming to provide a précis (i.e. a summary) of the entire discussion, it didn’t seem appropriate to use such a term to describe my rehash.

 

[Alfred]

7 hours ago, William Overington said:

"O" Level English

 

24 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:

Doesn't mean a thing here. Not now and not ever.

 

18 minutes ago, garrettm30 said:

Yeah, I was confused about that too. I just guessed that maybe it was a certain type of educational requirement than what we have in my own country (U.S.A.).

I think it’s all changed now, but “O” [Ordinary] Levels in England and Wales — or “O” Grades in Scotland — are/were standard examinations sat by pupils in secondary education (i.e. high school) at the end of Year 11, with “Highers” (Scotland) or “A” [Advanced] Levels (England/Wales) being taken one or two years later. Grades achieved in such exams are used to judge suitability for entrance to university and college courses, and sometimes for assessing aspiring entrants to the job market (e.g. “Must have at least three ‘O’ Levels, including English and Mathematics”).

[garrettm30]

Thanks for the explanation. In the U.S., there are a couple of common standardized tests called the SAT or the ACT that I think serve a similar purpose. Different universities have different requirements as to which test is recognized or even required. Many, for example, require a certain minimum score on one of these tests for entrance, and often very high scores can result in offering of scholarships.

[Alfred]

Thanks, Garrett. I had heard of SAT but not ACT (other than meaning “Australian Capital Territory”, but that’s a rather different context).

[William Overington]

Regarding "O" Level English,

15 minutes ago, Old Bruce said:

Doesn't mean a thing here. Not now and not ever.

 

6 hours ago, William Overington said:

... there was a qualification known as "O" Level English Language, which was typically taken at thre age of 16. Evidence of at least five passes at "O" Level were a necessary part of being able to enter higher education, these five had to be English Language, Mathematics, a science subject, a foreign language (typically, though not necessarily, French), one other, possibly, if I remember correctly, referred to as "a humanity" (typically history or geography).

Educational systems often differ from country to country.

In England the general eduction level of education at what is the initial level of what are known as public examinations is currently the General Certificate of Secondary Education.

"O" levels are no longer a current examination.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Certificate_of_Secondary_Education#Previous_qualifications

"O" levels are now regarded as a GCSE equivalent in situations where a GCSE pass (often at more than the basic level) is required, for employment or entry to a higher level of study.

Typically entry to higher education required a minimum of the five "O" levels as I mentioned before as a background of a good level of general education, together with at least two "A" level passes, the "A" levels typically taken at the age of 18, two years after taking "O" levels.

However, in practice, an offer of entry to a degree course typically required three "A" levels being passed, often with passes at higher, sometimes much higher, than the basic pass grade being a condition of the offer. Though what was required varied greatly from place to place and from course to course.

William

 

 

[William Overington]

21 minutes ago, garrettm30 said:

Thanks for the explanation. In the U.S., there are a couple of common standardized tests called the SAT or the ACT that I think serve a similar purpose. Different universities have different requirements as to which test is recognized or even required. Many, for example, require a certain minimum score on one of these tests for entrance, and often very high scores can result in offering of scholarships.

In the USA, from what I have read previously, degree awarding is not a Federally Regulated activity. So it varies State by State and sometimes, at least some years ago when I learned of this, not regulated at all. I remember that this was explained that that is because anything not specifically dealt with by The Constitution is governed by such laws that a State makes. Degree awarding is not in The Constution (unless there has been a recent ammendment of which I am unaware).  

Universities tend to Accredit each other in groups.

In England, possibly in the whole of the United Kingdom, a degree can only be awarded by an institution formally allowed to do so by The State.

William

 

[Alfred]

26 minutes ago, William Overington said:

In England, possibly in the whole of the United Kingdom, a degree can only be awarded by an institution formally allowed to do so by The State.

Please see: https://www.gov.uk/check-university-award-degree/recognised-bodies

[Dan C]

@William Overington, @Alfred, @Old Bruce, @LibreTraining & @garrettm30.

Just to inform you this thread has been split from the original post, due to the deviation from the original topic. Please ensure you are Following this new thread, should you wish to be notified of further replies