On 18-5-2012 08:20, Philipp Gesang wrote:
On 2012-05-18 00:00, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 17-5-2012 16:11, Philipp Gesang wrote:
So I judged that my preferred choice might not be as good as I
think. I got cold feet and am about to remove the slide where I
recommend the PS name (I can do that later anyways). Is there --
apart from personal opinions -- some valid reason to prefer one
name over the other *in general*?
For a project that has to run for a long time, I prefer filenames
(file:). When fonts are stable names can be used too and the name
resolved will check several names in the font. Spaces are ignored
and names are lowercases. There's also some fallback name
construction going on. Anyhow, the biggest problem is with fonts
that have the same names (but different files).
I see. But even the filename can be treacherous: afair there is a
times.ttf among the MS core fonts but it’s different from the one
shipped with their office tools. The font name guessing, otoh,
seems pretty elaborate, though I have not had the opportunity to
look at it in detail.
I always put such fonts in tex/texmf-fonts/fonts/data so that I'm sure
what gets used.
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : [email protected] / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
