On Aug 9, 2006, at 3:58 PM, Taco Hoekwater wrote: >> I've experimented with afm2pl, and as I wrote in an earlier mail: the >> beginning of EC.enc with its additional LIGKERN instructions confuses >> it so it will not include default ligatures. > > As it turns out, this is the same for afm2tfm. And to make matters > even more confusing, I had the following problem: At one point, > I had copied EC.enc to the current directory and fixed it. However, > it still didn't work, because: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] new]$ ls *.enc > EC.enc > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] new]$ kpsewhich --progname=dvips ec.enc > /opt/tex/teTeX/texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/base/EC.enc > > because of a line in /opt/tex/teTeX/texmf/aliases :-/ > > > > Either way, it seems that this LIGKERN interpretation that > overrules the afm file is actually considered a feature. The > sane way out seems to be to ship our own encoding files in > > fonts/enc/texfont > > or so. > > Taco
Yes, I have a dim recollection that afm2tfm has the same problem. Isn't lm-ec.enc the better choice anyway? Couldn't we make texfont default to lm-ec.enc when it is called with --en=EC? And for the LIGKERN: yes, I asked about them on the tex-fonts list a while ago, and nobody considered them a problem. IMHO, they're totally useless or even worse, but I received the same ol' answers: can't change that, it's legacy etc. I think Mojca knows something about this as well. So my suggestion would be: make ec a synonym for lm-ec in texfont (but then, because of one or to glyphnames, lm- ec.enc has to be in the mapfile as well). Thomas _______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
