On 05.08.2008 12:09:37 John Brown wrote:
> Hello Jeremias,
> 
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Your configuration is slightly wrong. It should look like this:
> 
> You fixed the problem. Thanks.
> 
> I saw your other post in which you said that FOP will now automatically
> replace font weight 400 with 200. I will try it soon, but just for my
> understanding, could you answer the following questions related to [1],
> [2], and [3] below?
> 
> > <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> > <fop>
> >   <fonts>
> 
> [1]     <substitutions>
> 
> >       <substitution>
> 
> [2]         <from font-family="URW Bookman L" font-weight="400"/>
> 
> >         <to font-family="URW Bookman L" font-weight="200"/>
> >       </substitution>
> >     </substitutions>
> >   </fonts>
> >   <renderers>
> >     <renderer mime="application/pdf">
> >       <fonts>
> 
> [3]         <directory recursive="true">/usr/local/share/fonts</directory>
> 
> >         <auto-detect/>
> >       </fonts>
> >     </renderer>
> >   </renderers>
> > </fop>
> > 
> 
> 
> > The substitutions are defined for all renderers.
> 
> 1) I see that the <substitutions> element was in the wrong place.
> 
>    I'm not sure how I could have made such a basic mistake.
>    Feature request: Would it be possible for FOP to validate
>    against a DTD, so that the user would know that his configuration
>    is bad?

We have an XML Schema but it's probably lagging behind:
src/foschema/fop-configuration.xsd
Improvements welcome.

> > Plus see my changes to the from/to elements.
> 
> 2) Are you saying that I need to use the numerical weights instead of
>    "normal", "bold", etc.? I was not really using question marks; I 
>    was just indicating the values that I varied during my trial-and-error
>    process.

As mentioned by Adrian, "normal" and "bold" can also be used. But
internally, FOP uses the numerical values. See also:
http://www.w3.org/TR/xsl11/#font-weight

>    By the way, how would I know that the weight or URW Bookman L Light
>    is 200? I thought that fontforge would have told me, but the font info
>    dialog box showed the weight as Regular.

http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/fonts.html#q46 gives some hints.

This shows how we currently map the weight names to a numerical value:
https://svn.apache.org/viewvc/xmlgraphics/fop/trunk/src/java/org/apache/fop/fonts/FontUtil.java?view=markup


> > 
> > I've also fixed a couple of problems in Trunk found while looking into
> > this:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=682616&view=rev
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=682617&view=rev
> > 
> 
> I tested with 682617, and it seems to be OK now.
> 
> > Now I need to check why the font lookup didn't automatically replace the
> > weight 400 with weight 200. I thought I had added that at some point.
> > 
> 
> I will try your latest update in a little while.
> 
> 
> 


Jeremias Maerki


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

Reply via email to