Over the years I've kept an eye on the lists. Every year it seems like
someone's interested, and someone's willing. Right now I guess I don't know
if anyone is actively working on /proper/ CFF support. So hopefully I'm not
stepping on anyone's toes.
I've attached a patch with a quick, dirty
Alex Zepeda wrote:
I've attached a patch with a quick, dirty, and naive hack. For OTF/CFF
fonts, it embeds the CFF table wholesale in the PDF as a FontFile3 with
the proper Subset fields. This gets you WinAnsi characters only.
Pretty sure there's no kerning in there either.
Andreas Delmelle wrote:
If I judge correctly, taking full advantage of CFF would mean that, instead
of just asking the font what the width is of a single given char, we would
pass it a sequence of chars and rely on the font code to figure out the
impact of merging/ligatures etc.
While I wrote
Glenn Adams wrote:
Actually, many fonts from MSFT, Adobe, and others are starting to take
advantage of the OpenType GSUB/GPOS and related advanced typographic
tables, even for fonts used with Latin and other Western scripts. Since
(generic) support for these mechanisms has been added in the
Te
Glenn Adams wrote:
It may be useful to wait until the Temp_ComplexScripts branch is merged
into trunk to decide how to proceed with CFF. It is possible my client
would like me to take a stab at CFF, so I may be able to add that to my
task list.
Perhaps. Exposing the CFF data is trivial tho.
Glenn Adams wrote:
From what I can tell, the CFF data primarily is related to outline
presentations, which themselves have no relationship to kerning per se.
So, the question seems one of how to employ the CFF outline
representations in an OTF/CFF context, and how to pass through that
outlin
Glenn Adams wrote:
From what I can tell, the CFF data primarily is related to outline
presentations, which themselves have no relationship to kerning per se.
So, the question seems one of how to employ the CFF outline
representations in an OTF/CFF context, and how to pass through that
outlin
Glenn Adams wrote:
Also, note that 'salt' and 'ss01' through 'ss20' should be off by
default. I plan to add an extension mechanism to permit the author to
enable optional features, which will handle this usage.
Yup. I turned it on because I wanted the alternate glyphs. My solution right
no
