On Tuesday 11 March 2003 16:10, Bruce D'Arcus wrote: > On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 09:46 AM, Patrick Gundlach wrote: > > Yes and no... ConTeXt is looking for fonts with names that are totally > > unusual compared to the ordinary TeX (LaTeX) System. Most TeX systems > > (and I guess GW TeX as well) support psnfss, the postscript font > > system to be used with latex. That means, that you should have fonts > > named in a cryptic way "pplr8r.tfm" or such. ConTeXt on the other hand > > looks for fontnames like "8r-uplr8a.tfm". Almost no one has a font > > named like this on their system. > > This kind of thing is just silly. The above named file is no more > clearly named than the psnfss version, so what's the point?
It is clearer: the first bit gives the encoding and the latter bit is the name of the file containign the glyphs (uplr8a.pfb). OTOH since LaTeX already creates a lot of font-mess, I do agree that there is no need to add more to the trouble already there. I would like to see a few sym-links (does Windows have something like that?) to add a few names to the tree to make sure everything works as planned. Since texfont uses afm2tfm directly (and the tfm files that come with psnfss are hand tuned) I don't think that using texfont blindly is a very good idea. It would be better to use the existing tfm files. The dvips documentation on aft2tfm lists what's been added to the tfm's in the psnfss collection, I cannot recall this right now. Cheers, Maarten Sneep _______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
