Thanks for the comprehensive testing!
I guess we could add bug no 1618 (page-number-citation) to this.
The errors with TrueType fonts occurs because the characters are not from
unicode to the font encoding (or cid) for page-number-citation etc, this is
only done in the LineArea class. I think I should move this mapping from the
LineArea class to the PDFRenderer's renderWordArea method. This will
hopefully fix most of those bugs.

Non-breakable spaces ( ) is another issue. It's rendered as a square
because the font doesn't have a nbsp glyph (I don't think any fonts has?).
The square is the fonts .notdef glyph (glyph index 0). This is used for cid
encoded truetype fonts, for type1 or winansi encoded truetype fonts, a # is
To implement nonbreaking space one would have to create special handling for


-----Original Message-----
From: Petr Andrs [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, May 26, 2001 09:51
Subject: Comprehensive testing with TTF

Hi all,

since usage of TTFs is essential for me and since I encountered some
situations in the past when things working perfectly with default fonts
went wrong when used with embedded TTFs I decided to test TTF embedding

First I took all *.fo testfiles/examples from FOPs distribution (CVS
snapshot from May 24) and processed it into PDFs as it were in the
distribution. After that I changed all font-family definitions to embed
my TTFs and I also placed attribute font-family="Arial" at fo:root
element in all files to use my TTF by default instead of Helvetica
which seems to be default when no font-family is specified. Then I
processed all fo files again with TTF embedding and finally I compared
results obtained with default fonts and with my TTFs.

And I made following conclusions:

* fo:character and fo:leader is broken when used with embedded TTFs.
(see in character.pdf and leader.pdf).

* I think that in widowsorphans.pdf on page 3 in table which has set
widows=4 and orphans=3 is problem, there are 5 lines in one column
and one line in other column.

* files omit.pdf and headfoot.pdf are rendered quite different when
using TTFs compared to results obtained with standard fonts. But I
don't know the intended look of these files and I am unable to decide
whether this is a bug or it is OK and chnaged look is caused just   by
different metric of TTF font.

* Hyphenation which was problem some time ago is now working fine with
 embedded TTFs.

* non-breakable space (character  ) doesn't work as I would expect
  when using both standard fonts and embedded TTFs, but it is more
obvious when using TTFs because in this case non-breakable space
renders as a square.

All these problems (except non-breakable space) are demonstrated in
files you can get at
(it didn't pass through the list because it is bit larger than 100 kB)

I am using WinNT 4.0 SP 6a, JDK 1.3.1 and CVS snapshot of FOP from May

Petr Andrs

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to