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 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
