6:32 a.m.
Type 1 outline OpenType fonts work very well through fontconfig, but it
seems that they do not print. Evolution will just leave the space blank,
Firefox will substitute (seems to pick a generic font - IE my monospace
sans-serif font is substituted with a variable serif font when firefox
prints).
AbiWord won't even load the font (apparently intentionally) so that you
don't pick a font you can't print.
Virtually all Adobe fonts are now only available in this format, and
many other foundries are at least headed that direction (though often
makey type1 and/or ttf available as well).
I can use fontforge to change them to a format that does print (though
I'm not sure if the licenses that forbid decompiling would like that) so
its not a huge issue, but I'm curious as to what work (if any) is going
on in the Fedora/Gnome world to bring proper type1 otf printing support
to Fedora.
The ttf outline opentype fonts (which seem to have a .ttf extension)
such as Palatino Linotype seem to work just fine. It's only the .otf
fonts that don't print (but look absolutely gorgeous on screen).
3:36 p.m.
On Mon, 2005-10-10 at 14:36 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
Michael A. Peters wrote:
> It's only the .otf
> fonts that don't print (but look absolutely gorgeous on screen).
I could swear I've used at least several .otf fonts just fine in the
past. How many different fonts did you try? (And, if you don't mind,
which ones were they?)
They work just fine for display - and some apps substitute others when
printing.
These are the fonts -
1) Helvetica LT Std (from Adobe)
2) Courier Std (from Adobe - free with Acroread in their Fonts
directory)
3) LucidaMonoEFOP (Elsner+Flake)
Lucida Mono is an exceptionally beautiful (imho) monospace font, reminds
me a lot of Monaco on Mac OS.
4:29 p.m.
Could there be print driver differences?
man, 10.10.2005 kl. 22.36 skrev Michael A. Peters:
On Mon, 2005-10-10 at 14:36 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
> Michael A. Peters wrote:
> > It's only the .otf
> > fonts that don't print (but look absolutely gorgeous on screen).
>
> I could swear I've used at least several .otf fonts just fine in the
> past. How many different fonts did you try? (And, if you don't mind,
> which ones were they?)
They work just fine for display - and some apps substitute others when
printing.
These are the fonts -
1) Helvetica LT Std (from Adobe)
2) Courier Std (from Adobe - free with Acroread in their Fonts
directory)
3) LucidaMonoEFOP (Elsner+Flake)
Lucida Mono is an exceptionally beautiful (imho) monospace font, reminds
me a lot of Monaco on Mac OS.
5:47 p.m.
On Mon, 2005-10-10 at 23:29 +0200, Kyrre Ness Sjobak wrote:
Could there be print driver differences?
OK - it seems to be a evolution issue.
Mozilla is printing them correctly now, which makes me think that when I
tested (shortly after installing) it had a font cache issue with its
print driver.
Evolution though - prints blank to printer and to pdf. However, gedit
prints just fine - I believe both use gnomeprint.
I'll find a free Type1 outline font and repeat it and file a bugzilla.
3:23 a.m.
>>>> "Michael" == Michael A Peters
<mpeters(a)mac.com> writes:
Michael> Type 1 outline OpenType fonts work very well through
Michael> fontconfig, but it seems that they do not print.
As you've found support for sfnt/cff fonts is not as exhaustive as it
ought to be. Part of the problem is that not everyone knows how to
embed them into a postscript or pdf stream (or file). There are just
enough differences that it takes new code, and there is no library yet
providing that code.
(Actually the latest versions of QT may have such library level
support, but even there many packages -- including kde 3.x --
are written to the QT3.x api and need to be ported to QT4.x.)
Some packages have added support (eg scribus 1.3.x) and some will
eventually (eg Abiword). If libgnomeprint-2.12 has support for
embedding sfnt/cff then many more applications will, too.
An interm solution is to follow what is being done for TeX. The lcdf
type tools (available at http://www.lcdf.org/type/) now include
several tools for otf (aka sfnt/cff) fonts. Specifically you want to
use cfftot1 to convert either raw cff fonts or sfnt/cff fonts into
type1 fonts. This will be more robust than using fontforge and
probably less likely to cause licensing problems.
(Embedding a sfnt/cff font into level 1 or 'early' level 2 postscript
requires doing this anyway, so leaving the type1 representation on
disk shouldn't be an issue, but of course ymmv....)
Note though that converting to t1 format looses all of the opentype
features. All of the glyphs are still there but you may not be able
to access them. So this is only an *interm* solution.
-JimC
--
James H. Cloos, Jr. <cloos(a)jhcloos.com>
5:03 a.m.
On Tue, 2005-10-11 at 04:23 -0400, James Cloos wrote:
An interm solution is to follow what is being done for TeX. The lcdf
type tools (available at http://www.lcdf.org/type/)
lcdf-typetools is now in Fedora Extras and in fact is what I have been
using to use otf fonts in LaTeX quite succesfully. I have used it to
make Type1 fonts for system use - though I ran into some oddities with
some fonts - such as Helvetica having some numbers (1 and 2) superscript
when they shouldn't be.
Same thing with the superscript happens with fontforge -c 'open($1);
generate($2)' HelveticaLTStd-Roman.otf HelveticaLTStd-Roman.pfb
However, using fontforge to generate a .ttf works just fine.
I suspect that (at least with Helvetica) I need to tell it more about
which glyphs it is suppose to use. I'm guessing the font has a
superscript 1 and 2 and when making the more limited glyph set .pfb - it
guesses wrong about which 1 and 2 it should use.
Interestingly, the Helvetica LT Std font generated for LaTeX using
otftotfm works just fine, it's just generated .pfb's for outside latex
that have the issue.
Note though that converting to t1 format looses all of the opentype
features. All of the glyphs are still there but you may not be able
to access them. So this is only an *interm* solution.
The support is actually better than I thought.
When Mozilla couldn't print them I thought support just wasn't there at
all - but it seems now that was just the print font cache wasn't updated
so it used the fallback.
4:47 p.m.
>>>> "Michael" == Michael A Peters
<mpeters(a)mac.com> writes:
Michael> lcdf-typetools is now in Fedora Extras and in fact is what I
Michael> have been using to use otf fonts in LaTeX quite
Michael> succesfully. I have used it to make Type1 fonts for system
Michael> use - though I ran into some oddities with some fonts - such
Michael> as Helvetica having some numbers (1 and 2) superscript when
Michael> they shouldn't be.
Adobe's Std series of otf fonts should have glyphs named /one.superior,
/two.superior and /three.superior in additon to the /one, /two and
/three glyphs since those superiors exist in the latin1 and
adobestandard encoding vectors.
Why anything should be using the superior when the lining are
requested is a good question. W/o the fonts I cannot make a guess.
What version of the typetools is in extras? 2.35 is current.
-JimC
--
James H. Cloos, Jr. <cloos(a)jhcloos.com>
6779
days inactive
6781
days old
8 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
James Cloos -
Kyrre Ness Sjobak -
Michael A. Peters -
Rex Dieter