On 19/01/12 01:10, Chris Bowditch wrote: > On 18/01/2012 13:13, Robert Eberhardt wrote: >> Hello Craig, > > Hi Robert, > >> >> as far as i know a pfb, a afm and a pfm file is needed. At least >> under fop 0.95. Did this change under fop 1.0. > > FOP v1.0 does not introduce support for OTF CFF glyphs. This is a > feature we would like too! You mwill need to work around the > limitation using an approach like Craig suggested.
Unfortunately, as far as I can tell fop can also only handle simple 1-byte encoding fonts for PostScript output. You might be OK with this, but if you need broad charset support like me you'll be stuffed. I currently get to pick between: - Abbreviated fonts without half the symbols I need that *do* work with PostScript output; or - Fonts that don't work with PostScript output but do contain all the symbols I need I'd love to use direct PDF instead of PostScript output, but I'm being bitten by the inability to de-duplicate embedded subsets when PDFs are inserted using fop-pdf-image. Distiller can de-duplicate subsets when converting PostScript to PDF, so using fop's PostScript output lets me work around that fop-pdf-image limitation. Or at least it would, if only I could use the fonts I need with PS output... I'm working on implementing font subset merging in fop-pdf-image, or at least font re-embedding, but it's quite complicated to do and will take time, esp as I have to get this project out the door and working ASAP so I can't put too much time into that right now. I seem to be hitting another limitation whenever I find a workaround for one, though. This one seems insoluible: If fop can't use 2-byte encoded fonts in PS output, and can't dedupe subset fonts in PDF output, I'm stuck. -- Craig Ringer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
