Victor Mote wrote:
> I am thinking through ways to eliminate as much user involvement in using
> non-base-14 fonts as possible. Is there a performance benefit to parsing the
> XML metric files instead of extracting the information directly from the
> font file itself at runtime?

Well, as far as I understand TTF and PFB files have a directory
and lots of pointers to other parts of the file. The metric
extractor loads the whole file into memory, for convenience.
This can be a significant memory load, and all the glyph
geometry definitions take up space unnecessarily.
This could probably be avoided using the RandomAccessFile class,
but I expect performance going down the toilet in this case.
Another point, important IMO, is that the metrics file can be
edited after extraction. Some fonts contain awful data.

I agree that user fonts should be made more usable, for example
by integrating a one step font metrics generation and installation
into the main command line application. Another possibility would
be a metrics file repository, combined with a tool which searches
the repository and the locally installed fonts and then installs
the font in the FOP config.


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

Reply via email to