[Fonts] Re: [ft] Creating an [OT]TF font from BDF font
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 13:16, David Turner wrote: - I don't understand completely the difference between atoms and non-property strings. Aren't these the same things ? Why distinguish them then ? Well 5005.BDF_Spec.pdf says that the thing that comes after the FONT keyword should be a PostScript name-literal (which has no quotes), while properties are either integers or quoted-strings. I have no idea what the significance of this distinction is in the BDF format, therefore I thought I had better preserve it. You may be right that there is none. If anyone can guarantee that it doesn't matter, I'll remove it and say that non-property strings get no quotes, while property strings need quotes. ___ Fonts mailing list Fonts@XFree86.Org http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
[Fonts] Re: [ft] Creating an [OT]TF font from BDF font
On Wed, 2005-12-14 at 13:16, David Turner wrote: PS: By the way, your .otb file doesn't display correctly in ftview, I'll try to investigate this later... I believe this is because the three strikes I used to build the otb file have different character sets -- none of which is complete. So the 14 pixel strike says it fails because it does not contain U+0180 while the 16 pixel strike does contain it. The 16 pixel strike is lacking U+02B0 (present in the 24 pixel strike) and the 24 pixel strike is lacking U+060c (present in the 16 pixel strike). And so on. I had assumed they'd all have the same character set since they had the same name, but I guess they don't. As far as I can tell, it displays the glyphs that exist correctly, but complains about glyphs not in the current strike. ___ Fonts mailing list Fonts@XFree86.Org http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/fonts
