26 Nov 2002 Reinhard Kotucha <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Staszek Wawrykiewicz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > It seems somehow strange. Why both map files differ? As I
>  > understand the whole mechanism, different map files for dvips
>  > and pdftex are only needed when we use fonts from the standard
>  > set for PostScript devices (35 Laser Writer fonts) or for .pdf
>  > files (Acrobat Reader has 14 builtin fonts, a subset of
>  > 35LW). For all other fonts the map files should be the same:

> In pdftex.map the internal PS /FontName should be omitted.  If you
> include an external PDF file which, say, uses the font
> /Palatino-Roman, the current version of pdfTeX tries to substitute the
> font.  It looks in pdftex.map for Palatino-Roman, but it does not
> check whether the font is transformed and might fetch the wrong one.
The primary thread was about nonstandard (vendor's) font installed
by the user, so my reply as above. [by the way, I sent it on 31 Oct,
but it was published on Nov 25 ?].

Your message is however interesting: do you mean that pdftex.map
should contain for future pdftex, say:
ptmr8r "TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc
(internal PS /FontName omitted)?

As for now only transformed constructs can work, e.g.:
ptmbo8r ".167 SlantFont TeXBase1Encoding ReEncodeFont" <8r.enc <utmb8a.pfb
but they need explicite information which font program is to be transformed
(utmb8a.pfb), so cannot be applied to the builtin fonts. Am I wrong?

The whole mess about fonts, maps, etc. is still waiting for a good
explanation/road map. As I've observed, the users always cannot understand 
it (not counting that mailing-list members ;-)

Staszek Wawrykiewicz

Reply via email to