RE: [ft-devel] patch for Type1 Unicode cmap on Windows
U+00A0 is not a space but a non-break space, so something is wrong here surely? Graham Asher -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sergey Tolstov Sent: 08 May 2008 07:00 To: freetype-devel@nongnu.org Subject: [ft-devel] patch for Type1 Unicode cmap on Windows Hello, Type 1 driver uses Adobe Glyph List to build the Unicode cmap. Windows GDI creates a little different mapping. For example, if there is 'periodcentered' glyph name in the Type 1 font, Windows maps 0x2219 to that glyph and freetype does not. I have run AGL 2.0 and WGL4 through a script and found that there are the following glyph names in WGL4, which are mapped to additional Unicode values: Delta 0x0394 Omega 0x03A9 fi 0xF001 fl 0xF002 fraction0x2215 hyphen 0x00AD macron 0x02C9 mu 0x03BC periodcentered 0x2219 space 0x00A0 uni203E 0x203E Out of these, the fl and fi are not mapped by Windows, and uni203E can be omitted. This leaves 8 WGL specific mappings. Delta: 0x0394 Omega: 0x03A9 fraction: 0x2215 hyphen: 0x00AD macron: 0x02C9 mu: 0x03BC periodcentered: 0x2219 space: 0x00A0 I suggest you to consider a patch for the psmodule.c, which maps these glyph names on top of regular AGL mapping. The mapping is created if the glyph name is present in the font, and the Unicode value is not assigned by the AGL mapping. The patch is made on top of 2.3.5. During testing with a font, named Agate, 6 additional entries are being created in the unicode cmap (for 2215, AD, 2C9, 3BC, 2219, A0). With the patch, freetype maps those unicodes in the same way as GDI. Those unicodes are mapped to 0 without the patch. Thanks, Sergey Tolstov ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
[ft-devel] CFF subfont matrix problem
Folks, the PS language reference manual the following for CID-keyed PS fonts: At glyph rendering time, the glyph coordinate system is defined by the concatenation of the FontMatrix entry in the selected FDArray dictionary with the FontMatrix entry in the CIDFont dictionary. Is this true for (pure) CFF also? Technical note #5176 (The Compact Font Format Specification) doesn't say a word. Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] CFF subfont matrix problem
On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 14:52, Werner LEMBERG wrote: the PS language reference manual the following for CID-keyed PS fonts: At glyph rendering time, the glyph coordinate system is defined by the concatenation of the FontMatrix entry in the selected FDArray dictionary with the FontMatrix entry in the CIDFont dictionary. Is this true for (pure) CFF also? Technical note #5176 (The Compact Font Format Specification) doesn't say a word. When I was playing with this I never got anything to work but having all sub-fonts have the same [ 0.001 0 0 0.001 0 0 ] FontMatrix and omitting the FontMatrix at the top level. Everything else seemed to yield unexpected results on my printer. ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
[ft-devel] how to build demo with visula c
Hi, I'm trying to test ft235.zip and ftdmo235.zip for windows. so I compliled built ft235 with visual c, so I got a freetype235ST_D.lib. good!. buf I don't know how to build the demo project with visual c. Could you help me with it? Thanks in advance. ecpark ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
Re: [ft-devel] CFF subfont matrix problem
the PS language reference manual the following for CID-keyed PS fonts: At glyph rendering time, the glyph coordinate system is defined by the concatenation of the FontMatrix entry in the selected FDArray dictionary with the FontMatrix entry in the CIDFont dictionary. Is this true for (pure) CFF also? Technical note #5176 (The Compact Font Format Specification) doesn't say a word. When I was playing with this I never got anything to work but having all sub-fonts have the same [ 0.001 0 0 0.001 0 0 ] FontMatrix and omitting the FontMatrix at the top level. Everything else seemed to yield unexpected results on my printer. Hmm. Please have a look at this thread: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/freetype-devel/2005-04/msg00059.html and look at the 2048.cff font which is attached to it. This is a font which converts 2048 to 1000 font units in the subfont, but it lacks a top-dict font matrix. On the other hand, Ding Li's test font from http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/freetype-devel/2008-03/msg00017.html has a both a top-level and subfont font matrix; the former is the standard [0.001 0 0 0.001], while the latter is [1 0 0 1]; with other words, it only gives decent results if you concatenate the matrices. Assuming that both those fonts have been extracted from documents which correctly work with Acroread (Ding Li, Dirck, please confirm) I assume that it has some heuristic code to either select [1 0 0 1] or [0.001 0 0 0.001] as the top-level matrix. I've also asked this question on the opentype mailing list. BTW, as reported earlier, fontforge 10-Apr-2008 doesn't like Ding Li's F10.ttf test font -- it appears to allocate a hge chunk of memory far too big for my 1GByte RAM + 1GByte Swap. Werner ___ Freetype-devel mailing list Freetype-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
