On 07.01.2011 15:06:19 Eric Douglas wrote: > I've been trying to see if I can modify the source to eliminate the > fonts that come packaged with it. I'm not sure why it needs to include > Courier, Helvetica, etc.
The PDF specification requires support for the so-called Base 14 fonts. And so does the PostScript spec. We don't actually include the fonts, just the font metrics. So this hardly needs any space. > I would think they're just a waste of space if > FOP is designed to use custom fonts or installed fonts. I pass in > custom fonts using only Lucida which comes in one file for normal, one > for bold, one for unicode, and should be a different one for italic > which I haven't needed yet. > > I'm passing in the files that came with Windows XP in the fonts folder, > l_10646.ttf for unicode. For FOP to display a unicode character for the > 'glyph not found' error rather than one of standard ascii, it should > come packaged with a unicode font set. I print the □ character > to my reports and passing in the l_10646.ttf font that works fine. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jeremias Maerki [mailto:d...@jeremias-maerki.ch] > Sent: Friday, January 07, 2011 8:44 AM > To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org > Subject: Re: [Bug 50471] Greek Extended character throwing > ArrayIndexOutOfBoundException. > > I think so. The use of "#" is mostly historical due to lack of Unicode > support initially. At least I believe so. The first fonts were WinAnsi > only. IMO, it makes sense to make that transition. However, for > single-byte fonts, we might still need to use "#". Not sure. > > On 07.01.2011 14:17:42 Simon Pepping wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 07:31:07AM -0500, bugzi...@apache.org wrote: > > > https://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=50471 > > > > > > --- Comment #4 from Andreas L. Delmelle <adelme...@apache.org> > > > 2011-01-07 07:31:03 EST --- > > > > > > Very right indeed. > > > So, if no one objects, I will apply the patch as proposed. FOP will > > > no longer crash, but simply show a '#' for such unassigned > codepoints in the output. > > > Treating them as regular alphabetic characters seems to be safe > > > enough for the time being. > > > > Would it not be better to use character FFFD, 'Replacement Character', > > > ?, for this? > > > > Simon > > > > > Jeremias Maerki > Jeremias Maerki
