Thanks all for voting. The vote has now concluded and has passed with 6 +1 

I will look at merging this patch with trunk and update the necessary 
documentation soon.

To reiterate, the default for Type 1 fonts will be to fully embed unless 
explicitly stated otherwise in the configuration.


Robert Meyer

> Date: Tue, 20 May 2014 11:26:23 +0100
> From: vhenneb...@gmail.com
> To: fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Add Type 1 subset support
> The code has certainly improved since last time. Now glyph names are
> being used directly, without any round-trip to Unicode code point and
> back to character code. This is great as it simplifies the code quite
> a bit and makes it more robust.
> The PostScript parser hasn’t changed so my concerns about its resilience
> against ill-formed fonts remain. Also, while memory usage has improved
> a bit, there still seems to be unwarranted copying of byte arrays here
> and there. For example, the creation of the encrypted portion could be
> made on the fly by wrapping the output stream into a FilterOutputStream.
> Overall there is room for further streamlining and simplifying the code.
> But since it’s an optional feature I suppose there is no harm in letting
> interested users experiment with it. So I’ll vote +1.
> Thanks,
> Vincent
> On 14/05/14 10:22, Robert Meyer wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > Following on from the last failed vote for adding Type 1 subset support, I 
> > have now put forward a modified patch and am ready to try this again. The 
> > patch went up on Monday to address the issues and comments made by Vincent 
> > and Luis. This vote will last 5 working days and will finish next Wednesday 
> > at the same time.
> >
> > As always if you have any concerns or find anything please let me know. If 
> > they are small I will try and address the issue before the vote is 
> > finalized in order to avoid repeating this again. Please note that all type 
> > 1 fonts will default to full embedding unless you use the 
> > embedding-mode="subset" as per one of the recommendations from the last 
> > vote.
> >
> > Here is my vote: +1
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Robert Meyer
> >                                     
> >

Reply via email to