Open Bug 1742970 Opened 1 year ago Updated 1 year ago

[win7] Variable fonts are not displayed

Categories

(Core :: Layout: Text and Fonts, defect)

Desktop
Windows 7
defect

Tracking

()

Tracking Status
firefox-esr91 --- affected
firefox94 --- affected
firefox95 --- affected
firefox96 --- affected

People

(Reporter: atrif, Unassigned)

References

(Depends on 1 open bug)

Details

Attachments

(2 files)

Attached image fonts_w7

Affected versions

  • 96.0a1 (20211125095031)
  • 95.0b11 (20211123190150)
  • 94.0.2 (20211119140621)
  • 91.3.0esr (20211028170545)

Affected platforms

  • Windows7 x64

Steps to reproduce

  1. Open Firefox and https://v-fonts.com/.

Expected result

  • Fonts should be displayed.

Actual result

  • Browser not supported message and no fonts are displayed.

Regression range

  • I assume that this is most likely not a regression because the issue can be seen with Firefox 67.0a1 (2019-02-02) as well. I will search for one ASAP if there is one.

Notes

  • Screenshot attached.
  • Reproducible only on Windows 7.
Has Regression Range: --- → no
Has STR: --- → yes

I think this is by design, win7 doesn't have variable font support. Jonathan can confirm though.

Flags: needinfo?(jfkthame)
QA Whiteboard: [qa-regression-triage]

That's correct; we use DirectWrite to render fonts on Windows, and it didn't support variable fonts until the "Fall Creators Update" in late 2017 (see bug 1430632).

Supporting variation fonts on older OS versions would mean doing something like bug 1403299. (But I don't think it's a top priority.)

So this is not a regression; we have never supported this.

Depends on: 1403299
Flags: needinfo?(jfkthame)

Hmm, one thing that does surprise me is that the screenshot shows missing-glyph "boxes" for the font samples, rather than rendering a static instance of the font. I do wonder if that's a regression... @Alexandru, could you confirm if that was the same even before bug 1430632 landed?

Flags: needinfo?(alexandru.trif)
Attached image 59.0a1 (2018-01-15)

(In reply to Jonathan Kew (:jfkthame) from comment #3)

Hmm, one thing that does surprise me is that the screenshot shows missing-glyph "boxes" for the font samples, rather than rendering a static instance of the font. I do wonder if that's a regression... @Alexandru, could you confirm if that was the same even before bug 1430632 landed?

It seems that the same glyph boxes are displayed with 59.0a1 (2018-01-15) on my Windows 7x64 machine as well before bug 1430632 landed. Thank you!

Flags: needinfo?(alexandru.trif)
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.