Funny games
With some hours left before catching the train, I spent a brief visit to my favorite bookshop
Nijhof & Lee and encountered a book, recently added to their shelves, which is as voluminous as it is unaffordable:
Edo Smitshuijzen's
Arabic Font Specimen Book.
Being ignorant of the Arabic language and script, and unwilling to spend 150 Euros or increase the weight of my bag, I will restrict myself to very few pages which I had time to inspect – section 2.4 which dedicated to Adobe, WinSoft and the Adobe Arabic typeface, and some additional pages at onother occasion.
* Citations refer to (sub)sections rather than page numbers.
Bashing Adobe and WinSoft
After a brief warm-up rant about monopolies, the author dedicates about half of a page to demonizing "the American company" Adobe as having developed all its applications and become a "big player" and "global monopoly company" [2.4] only to put Adobe Arabic on top of it. The reader wonders what end this kind of agitation serves in what is called a "font" specimen book.
He then turns to "the French company WinSoft" [2.4.1]. WinSoft produces localized versions of Adobe's design applications, adding functionality required for Middle Eastern scripts so that designers can create documents that contain right-to-left direction text in languages like Arabic and Hebrew. This simple fact is transformed into an investigative story – "Customers are likely to have a distorted view of these relationships." [2.4.1] – which describes "the role of WinSoft" [2.4.1.1] as that a temporary vehicle for "fast dissemination of the core technology". Unfortunately he does not specify which "core technology" he is referring to. He reads into the fact that WinSoft is allowed to extend Adobe's applications a "lack of interest in quality control" on Adobe's part [2.4.1] and expressly mentions "the sub-standard quality of some parts of the ME version" [2.4.1.1]. This is not backed up by any facts either.
The author, who is not known for any contribution to the field, does not seem to know that especially the OpenType layout engine found in WinSoft's ME version of InDesign is more sophisticated than the one in Adobe's own regular version in that it supports right-to-left direction layout, GSUB lookup type 2, and other aspects necessary to make layout of Arabic text possible in the first place. Rather than bashing WinSoft, Mr Smitshuijzen better had sent them a thank-you card with hartelijke groet. Truth is that without WinSoft's efforts to enhance InDesign, the
Typographic Matchmaking project initiated by KHTT (aka the author's wife Huda Smitshuijzen AbiFares) would have been a waste of time simply because there are no other professional design applications in which to use these typefaces! To fill the gaps which Mr Smitshuijzen had left (or created) I recommend the WinSoft
company history and Fiona Ross'
Non-Latin Type Design at Linotype for a start.
And thereby obliterating DecoType
We are told that "WinSoft took the initiative to produce a plug-in for the ME publishing software (Adobe Indesign) [sic] called Tasmeem. The function of this plug-in in relation to the Indesign [sic] ME is not entirely clear." [2.4.1.1] First, it is DecoType who deserves credits for the initiative, having developed the ACE layout engine (which is at the heart of Tasmeem) years before there was InDesign. Second, since Mr Smitshuijzen's wife had drawn on DecoType knowlegde and illustrations when writing her book
Arabic Typography, as captions in this other book tell, one is left wondering how it is possible that things are "not entirely clear" to Mr Smitshuijzen. Yet indeed his former so-called
review of – whose: Adobe? WinSoft? (DecoType?), and what: layout technology? typefaces? – exhibits that he does not have the slightest clue himself what he is talking about. Maybe a quick look into my former note
Arabic weeks would have helped him to clear things up: There is a layout engine called ACE, developed by DecoType. WinSoft's Tasmeem, in form of a plug-in, makes ACE available for use in InDesign. This means that with InDesign ME designers can use normal (Arabic and non-Arabic) OpenType fonts, and with Tasmeem installed, use special ACE fonts as well. Consulting the manual can be enlightening too at times, but admittedly robs one of the chance to construct and then deconstruct conspiracy.
Disinformation does not stop here, and it is obvious that the target is not WinSoft but DecoType:
1 "There are only two similar typefaces available for this software [i.e. Tasmeem] ..." [2.4.1.1] This is another surprising read. The author himself, in a
comment [3 May 08, 11:37] after the above-mentioned review, alluded to DecoType's activities in producing more typefaces for use in Tasmeem! In a later
comment, Adam Twardoch [15 March 09, 16:24] even provided a link to the
result of this project. A sign of weak memory? Deliberate omission? The latter, I fear, since his own, more recent
article mentions that "in 2006 Titus Nemeth designed his Nassim font, which is now part of the type collection of the Tasmeem plug-in". Inspecting the
Arabic Font Specimen Book more carefully reveals that in the "Arabic publishing software/font developers" list, the typefaces that resulted from this project, together with typefaces designed by DecoType, are mentioned but are ascribed to WinSoft – as "WinSoft Collection", with an extra note "for use in Tasmeem" [p.154]. So the same book which claims there are "only two similar typefaces" for Tasmeem, at a less prominent place acknowledges that there are more indeed. The "Decotype Collection" [p.153] in turn appends a "DecoType" or "Tasmeem" prefix to typeface names, thus listing outdated and current versions of the same typeface, yet presenting a rather short list since all other DecoType typefaces have been pulled into the WinSoft section.
Moreover, does this remark about "two similar typefaces" indicate that Mr Smitshuijzen cannot tell apart typefaces of different styles? This leaves me wondering what gives him the confidence to publish a type (pardon: font) specimen book.
2 "... and the type technology is proprietary." [2.4.1.1] What is the purpose of dubbing the technology behind Tasmeem "proprietary"? Having bashed Adobe's "monopoly" before, Mr Smitshuijzen should welcome alternatives. DecoType's alternative layout technology – which, this must be emphasized, pre-dates OpenType – actually provides the mechanisms that Arabic script fonts desperately need to work properly.
3 "The two fonts are an integrated part of the plug-in software." [2.4.1.1] Again the false number of two. And though fonts were part and parcel with older versions of Tasmeem, this is not true any more for recent versions. The fonts are just as much "integrated part" as are the normal OpenType fonts that ship with Adobe software.
Revealing Adobe's secret future plans?
Musing about the bigger picture, Mr Smitshuijzen continues: "It is unclear whether Adobe will support this plug-in in future releases of their software. Recently, Adobe released the extensive Adobe Arabic font which can be seen as competing with the plug-in of WinSoft." [2.4.1.1] The author fails to make an essential distinction between layout technology and fonts. As said above, "this plug-in" – Tasmeem – makes DecoType's ACE layout engine available to InDesign. There is no competition between "this plug-in" and the Adobe Arabic "font" because these are two different levels, (a) font and (b) layout technology. If there was any competition at all, then either (a) between two fonts like DecoType's Naskh and Adobe Arabic, or (b) between two layout technologies like ACE layout technology and OpenType layout technology.
It is getting better. He announces that "Adobe will make 'word shaping' the new feature in their own future software releases and that part is one of the key features of the Tasmeem plug-in." [2.4.1.1] The 'word shaping' is a very special feature deeply rooted in ACE layout technology, yet completely alien to OpenType layout technology. So if there should ever be anything like OpenType-based 'word shaping', this would be something quite different than ACE 'word shaping'.
Does Mr Smitshuijzen have information about Adobe's future plans that other parties do not have, or is he just speculating? Whether fact or fancy: The assumption that OpenType layout technology and fonts would make ACE layout technology and fonts superfluous makes me laugh. When it comes to layout behavior as is required for Arabic, it is impossible for an OpenType font to come anywhere near the capabilities of an ACE font, for the plain fact that the OpenType approach of defining layout behavior is not suited well for Arabic. Perhaps not even for Latin, but that's another story. But I would not expect Mr Smitshijzen to reach such a conclusion since this would require knowledge of both OpenType and ACE layout technologies, neither of which he seems to have. Not to mention that it is absurd to think that the presence of a single font would make an alternative layout technology obsolete.
† This is like saying that because someone has designed a single nice book in XPress, it is time to remove InDesign from the market.
Misinformation and anti-Western rhetorics
After all, this section is about Adobe Arabic, and so Mr Smitshuijzen reveals that the makers of this typeface – the experts "Tim Holloway, Dr Fionna [sic] Ross and John Hudson" – are "all ... educated and living in the Anglo-Saxon countries" and "none of the team members mastered any of the languages involved". Those who make Arabic typefaces for "all big players" are "non-Arab professionals"! In contrast, Linotype is applauded for being "the first Western company to invite a native Arab, young Lebanese type designer to head the develpoment of their Arabic portfolio". [2.4.4.2] So finally we learn that it is Arab blood which qualifies one to make Arabic typefaces! I am baffled and rub my blue German eyes.
By employing keywords like "global", "American", "French", "Western", "non-Arab" versus "native Arab" which pervade the entire section, Mr Smitshuijzen heavily draws on anti-Western sentiments. This is the opposite of KHTT's self-declared "
mission" to "promote better understanding between Western nations and the Arab World/Middle East" ...
At the same time I have not been entertained more in a long time. So here we have a native Dutch author who tries hard to ridicule Americans, Englishmen, Frenchmen, but first of all the fellow Dutchmen at DecoType, for making layout technology and typefaces for Arabic type while lacking one special license: being native Arabs. Yet being a Dutchman himself, the author does not have this very license either. And in contrast to the DecoType guys he does not seem to ever have bothered to learn Russian, Turkish, Arabic, analyse the Arabic script, develop a special layout technology for representing the script faithfully, and design Arabic typefaces. To me, the latter sounds more of a qualification than just being married to Huda Smitshuijzen AbiFares, a "native Arab" designer who according to
her own account has been
born in Beirut but has received her
design education at "Yale University School of Art and Rhode Island School of Design" – thus being as much educated in one of "the Anglo-Saxon countries" as are the experts Mr Smitshuijzen denounces for exactly this! Yale and RISD may offer type courses but are not known for personnel qualified for teaching Arabic type design.
And this may be the reason why DecoType is swept under the carpet. DecoType is the 'real thing' – competent in terms of both design and technology – while the author and his wife have yet failed to produce any relevant contribution to Arabic typography themselves. And this lack of competence is not compensated by ad hominem attacks like painting a rare expert like John Hudson as "a self-taught type designer and font technician who stumbled into this profession by his unstoppable infatuation with books." [2.4.4.2] (What, by the way, if not a strong "infatuation with books", an interest in 'content' rather than mere 'design', should drag someone into typography and finally type design? Strange that what usually would be a compliment is reverted into an insult here. The same kind of attack can be found in a
comment in which Mr Smitshuijzen calls Vladimir Tamari's earlier comment a "poetic reaction" ...)
In similar vein, Mr Smitshuijzen's attempt to ridicule "this plug-in" Tasmeem turns against himself once one has a look at the result of the Typographic Matchmaking project.
DecoType, in decades of dedicated research and development, has tailored a technology around the requirements of the Arabic script. So there are no design compromises.
In contrast, the Typographic Matchmaking typefaces embody everything that Mr Smitshuijzen complains about – they compromise design so as to fit into a technology which is ill prepared to account for the richness of the Arabic script,
† a technology which moreover is made by a "Western" company.
‡
What's worse, part of these typefaces are not even produced properly for the technology chosen, making no or little use of OpenType layout tables. And as several sources said, the initiators of the project were not capable to provide any of the technical help that such a project would require. In one telling example, Peter Bilak turned to Titus Nemeth for the production of his Fedra Arabic and Multiscript typefaces, hinting at a lack of technical knowledge on the side of the initiators. Further evidence is found in Huda Smitshuijzen AbiFares' response to a request for technical help, which has no better
advice to offer than that "it is quite complicated" and "you would need to do some Volt encoding [sic]". The ignorance of the difference between 'coding' and 'encoding' alone speaks volumes. (Mr Smitshuijzen's own account of what he understood to be the production process of Adobe Arabic [a second 2.4.4.2 subsection], like the earlier "Font file" section [1.10 ff], is so flawed that we skip it in embarrassment.
Despite all this, Mr Smitshuijzen comes to this conclusion and suggestion: Adobe has wasted energy on the 'wrong' typeface, "a rather conventional font", and would do itself a favor by producing "fonts in the Nastaliq and the Ruqaa style" [2.4.4.3]. DecoType's
Nastaliq is, right now, available for use in Adobe InDesign ME via "the plug-in" Tasmeem which Mr Smitshuijzen was not shy to ridicule just a few paragraphs earlier, and the latter was done for Microsoft as early as in the 80s by – DecoType. And now the author encourages Adobe to spend time on realizing these in a technology (OpenType) which is not very well suited fo the Arabic script. The closing compliment, that Adobe be "in an unique position to mobilise the know-how needed ... to make this an important step forward for the typography of the Arabic script" [2.4.4.3] nourishes one suspicion. All the noise about non-Arab designers doing Arabic fonts and categorizing their work as "an Arabic tradition in font production not really worth following" [2.4.4.3] is purely strategic and the message is as simple as it is daring: We want to do important things. We are not prepared. We don't intend to prepare for it. So we declare the little we can do to be the only way to go.
Omissions
It is astonishing that a voluminous "overview of all typefaces available" [
announcement] manages to avoid showing essential work by DecoType, a company which is in business for 25 years, has brought Arabic type to both Microsoft Windows and Mac OS, has developed the ACE layout engine first as OLE for Microsoft and, in cooperation with WinSoft, made latest versions of it available to the design world in the form of Tasmeem. Instead, there is a "PakType Naskh Basic" which evidently is an illegal copy of DecoType's 1995 DTP Naskh, with outlines being scaled and corrupted. (I recommend that the author walk over to
Nijhof & Lee and ask for a copy of the little brochure "The DecoType Professional Font Series for Microsoft Windows DTP Naskh" of 1995, for comparison.)
Admittedly, given the above-mentioned
review whose title "A typographic matchmaking project for the 16th century: the Civilité of Granjon and the Naskh of Winsoft [sic]" says it all, it is of little surprise that DecoType is trashed in passing, their typefaces are either not shown, shown in outdated versions, or even ascribed to WinSoft. What is a little scandal though is that this book also omits typefaces by designers who dare to work with DecoType. Why do I search in vain for a sample of Titus Nemeth's
Nassim which has won several prices like TDC2 2007, European Design Awards 07, and was shown in the Design Museum London?
Regrets
I feel embarrassed that my longest note so far is dedicated to as unplesant a task as pointing out flaws in a text that, strictly speaking, is not worth being mentioned. My interest is in discussing design and technology, even heatedly, but this requires honesty and sticking to the fact, and some knowledge of course or at least a will to learn. Nothing of this did I find in said four or five pages, and, frankly, am not willing to inspect any more of them.
When ignoring the introductory part, maybe designers could still enjoy the typeface samples in the specimen section of the book?
Further reading
Titus Nemeth's
Complex Dutch Arab Complex. In:
TYPO 36 (summer 2009), pp 86-93. A brilliant review of this book. In contrast to my focus on technical aspects, Titus Nemeth's perspective is broader, covering aspects like terminology, history of Arabic typesetting, omissions both in terms of persons and image credits, and more. Highly recommended.
*
†
‡
Link for your feed reader.
