Chris Bowditch a écrit : > Jeff Vannest wrote: > >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Manuel Mall [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, January 29, >> 2007 8:01 PM >> To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org >> Subject: Re: Embedding font triplets w/ a single TTF file >> >>> FOP requires a font containing the actual bold (or italic) characters >>> it has no capability to derive / render a bold character from a given >>> 'plain' character. You would need to find a font which contains the >>> bold characters you are interested in. >> >> >> I understand the response, and that's the way it looked to me, too. >> Question: Why is this possible in Adobe PDF, Word, etc, but not in FOP, >> which follows the PDF spec? ...not a criticism...just wondering where >> the >> "catch" is. > > Well Word emulates the bold effect if no bold version of a Font is > available by printing the glyph on top of itself a few times (each time > having a slight offset from the last position) The XSL-FO spec doesn't > require such a feature. I guess it would be a useful feature if FOP did > this too, but I don't think the purists will like it.
Indeed. They would tell you: "A font is a set of glyphs carefully designed to look nice together. It may contain ligatures, glyph variants, spacing adjustments (so-called kerning, like in "AV") between certain glyphs to make text look even better. In fact a font can be seen like an artwork. Thus any attempt to tweak it in any way (setting a non-null letter-spacing, simulating bold or slanted typeface, etc.) can only distort the intent of the original author." So if I were you, I wouldn't try to derive a bold typeface from a normal one ;-) Like Jeremias said I would rather find a naturally bold font. Vincent --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
