On 2016-06-26 at 17:56:59 +0200, Pali Rohár wrote: > On Sunday 26 June 2016 17:41:44 Hans Hagen wrote: > > On 6/26/2016 5:16 PM, Pali Rohár wrote: > > > Apparently, some font styles of CSFonts have different mapping of > > > glyph names as basic roman style csr. Looks like /Encoding 256 > > > array is correct in all PFB files (only problem with Knuth's > > > dollar-sterling joke). > > > > that order is still unrelated to the real order in the glyph table > > (in thebinary section) > > Yes, order in that binary section (where are defined curves for glyphs) > is unrelated. But mapping from TFM index to glyph name is in that > /Encoding 256 array.
Not necessarily! If the TFM file requires another encoding, you definitely have to re-encode the font. In this case the built-in /Encoding isn't used. A common case to have several encodings for one font is that a font can have more than 256 glyphs. In order to access all of them you need a .tfm and a .enc file for each subset. However, the csfonts don't need to be re-encoded and actually are not. Consult the file csfonts.map. $ less `kpsewhich csfonts.map` Regards, Reinhard -- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Reinhard Kotucha Phone: +49-511-3373112 Marschnerstr. 25 D-30167 Hannover mailto:[email protected] ------------------------------------------------------------------
