[Moving to "Wikimedia" product as this request is about settings / configuration of the website, not about the codebase of MediaWiki itself.]

Hi Muhammad. For any configuration change, we require a local consensus. Could you discuss the matter on the Village pump page of your wiki to confirm that this change is wanted by the community, and paste the link to the discussion here?

There's no need. The font is unfree, and we will not install it.

See https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Thread:Talk:Universal_Language_Selector/Nastaliq_font_for_Urdu for more information.

sb_nadwi wrote:

ur.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%88%DB%8C%DA%A9%DB%8C%D9%BE%DB%8C%DA%88%DB%8C%D8%A7:%D8%AF%DB%8C%D9%88%D8%A7%D9%86_%D8%B9%D8%A7%D9%85/%D8%B7%D8%B1%D8%B2%DB%8C%D8%A7%D8%AA#.D8.B1.D8.A7.D8.A6.DB.92_.D8.B4.D9.85.D8.A7.D8.B1.DB.8C_.D8.A8.D8.B1.D8.A7.D8.A6.DB.92_.D8.AA.D9.86.D8.B5.DB.8C.D8.A8_.D9.86.D8.B3.D8.AA.D8.B9.D9.84.DB.8C.D9.82

Local consensus link.
Okeh, but alqalam taj nastaleeq is free font. You should enable it.

The license for AlQalam Taj Nastaleeq is here: http://alqlm.org/fonts/alqalam-fonts-license/; is it free enough for our purposes?

sb_nadwi wrote:

Yes, this font has been creared only for such open source projects.

Thanks for the clarification, Muhammad; let's reopen the bug for now and perhaps get some third opinions on the possibility of using that font?

This discussion has been going on for a while, but nothing can be done unless the interested users find a font with an open source/free software license as we did in bug 46693.

This AlQalam Taj Nastaleeq Open Font License is very long and doesn't allow derivatives to use any other license. It's not compatible with the Open Font License (OFL) and I doubt article 3.1.1 is compatible even with GPLv3 article 6, I mean the part which begins «The following must be also Redistributed together with the Derived Program, or be made available online or by means of mailing mechanisms in exchange for a cost which does not exceed the total costs of postage, storage medium and handling fees [...]».

I see the authors reserved the right to update the license. Please write them and ask to adopt the OFL http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=OFL_web&_sc=1 or to get approval of their license with this process: http://opensource.org/approval
Alternatively, test the Hussaini Nastaleeq font and let us know if its quality is good enough for you: http://openfontlibrary.org/en/font/hussaini-nastaleeq

When you're done with the above please post the results on bug 56939.

• This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 56939 ***

amanatali.goher wrote:

Jameel Noori Nastaleeq and Alvi Nastaleeq fonts are based on 'Noori Nastaleeq' font's ligatures. Noori Nastaleeq is own by Concept Software Private Limited, India and they have never authorized used of their ligatures in any other fonts. Hence, Jameel Noori Nastaleeq and Alvi Nastaleeq both are not suitable for use.

In my opinion, we can use Taj Nastaleeq, developed by Mr. Shakir ul Qadree, and Nafees Nastaleeq, developed by CRULP (www.cle.org.pk). Both fonts are free and open source.

I can personally invite Mr. Shaqir ul Qadree here to elaborate license terms of his font 'Taj Nastaleeq'.

Amanat Ali Goher
Editor in Chief
COMPUTING
Karachi

(In reply to comment #9)

I can personally invite Mr. Shaqir ul Qadree here to elaborate license terms
of
his font 'Taj Nastaleeq'.

Yes امانت علی گوہر, please do so. It would be greatly appreciated if you managed to get it released under the OFL
http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?item_id=OFL_web&_sc=1.

shakirulqadree wrote:

میرے محترم صاحبان
السلام علیکم
جناب امانت علی گوہر کا شکر گزار ہوں کہ انہوں نے مجھے یہاں آنے کی دعوت دی
القلم تاج نستعلیق کے متعلق گزارش ہے کہ اس فونٹ کے تقریبا ۴۰ ہزار ترسیمے مکمل طور پر میرے ذاتی تیار کردہ ہیں اور ان ترسیموں کو عوامی افادہ کے لیے مفت جاری کیا گیا ہے ۔ القلم تاج نستعلیق کے لائسنس میں یہ بات واضح طور پر درج ہے کہ اس فانٹ کو عوامی استفادہ کے لیے آزاد مصدر سافٹ ویئرز کے ساتھ بلا تکلف استعمال کیا جا سکتا ہے ۔ البتہ اس فانٹ کو کسی بھی تجارتی بنیادوں پر کام کرنے والی ویب سائٹ یا کمپیوٹر سافت ویئر میں استعمال نہیں کیا جا سکتا۔ وکی پیڈیا چونکہ ایک آزاد مصدر ویب سائٹ ہے نیز یہ علم پروری اور انتہائی بلند مقاصد کے تحت کام کر رہی ہے اس لیے القلم تاج نستعلیق کا کے لیے اس ویب سائٹ سے زیادہ مستحق اور کوئی نہیں ہو سکتا۔ مجھے خوشی ہے کہ وکیپیڈیا کے کار پردازان نے اس فونٹ کو اپنی سٹائل شیٹ میں شامل کرنے کی تجویز کو زیر غور لائے ہیں۔ مجھے مزید خوشی ہوگی اگر اس تجویز کو عملی جامہ پہنا دیا جائے
والسلام مع الاکرام
سید ابرار حسین (شاکرالقادری)۔

Thanks for commenting here, Abrar Hussain Shakir ul Qadree. I can only understand what Google Translate tells me, but no, that license is not clear enough. If you really care about your font being used by educational projects like Wikipedia, please adopt a standard free/open-source license like OFL or any other of your choice. http://opensource.org/licenses/category

shakirulqadree wrote:

deer sir
I think that license is very clear. if Wikipedia is Non Commercial website you can use Alqalam Taj Nastaleeq, and if it is a commercial site, you can not use it,

(In reply to comment #13)

deer sir
I think that license is very clear. if Wikipedia is Non Commercial website
you
can use Alqalam Taj Nastaleeq, and if it is a commercial site, you can not
use
it,

Thanks for the clarification. Wikipedia is not a non-commercial site but a free content site, hence your restriction is unwanted. Thank you anyway.
For more information see [[m:Free knowledge based on Creative Commons licenses]], in particular https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Free_knowledge_based_on_Creative_Commons_licenses#4._How_does_the_NC_module_affect_the_way_content_can_be_distributed.3F_.E2.80.93_NC-licensed_content_cannot_be_distributed_as_widely_and_easily..

shakirulqadree wrote:

I think if there is any confusion it is because of Google translator, therefor you are requsted to say Mr. Amanat Ali Gohar for translation of my URDU post. Iam sorry for my bad English. :)

shakirulqadree wrote:

Because Wikipedia is a free content site, I have no restriction.

amanatali.goher wrote:

(In reply to comment #14)

(In reply to comment #13)

deer sir
I think that license is very clear. if Wikipedia is Non Commercial website
you
can use Alqalam Taj Nastaleeq, and if it is a commercial site, you can not
use
it,

Thanks for the clarification. Wikipedia is not a non-commercial site but a
free
content site, hence your restriction is unwanted. Thank you anyway.
For more information see [[m:Free knowledge based on Creative Commons
licenses]], in particular
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/
Free_knowledge_based_on_Creative_Commons_licenses#4.
_How_does_the_NC_module_affect_the_way_content_can_be_distributed.3F_.E2.80.
93_NC-licensed_content_cannot_be_distributed_as_widely_and_easily.>.

Nemo,

Is it possible (and acceptable) to issue a license exclusively for Wikipeida?

I will work with Qadree sahib on license issue.

This bug report is closed as a duplicate, so comments should go to bug 56939 instead. It has been explained before that a "standard" license is needed, see comment 14.