Sorry, I was trying to explain two different things and I did not do a good
job separating the two which made my second confusing.

So say I do not change the mimetype file, when I run tool, the content type
for one of my .afm files gets returned as "application/x-font-type1", but
for the rest of my .afm files (about 8 other ones), the tool returns a
content type of "text/plain". By your answer, it seems like this might be an
issue in the detection of .afm files even in the original Tika build without
any of the changes I made.

Thanks,
Fernando

> On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 9:59 AM, Nick Burch <[email protected]>wrote:

> On Thu, 9 Jun 2011, Fernando Arreola wrote:
>
>> I read through 5 minute quick start tutorial and started following the
>> steps
>> detailed there. I noticed that the tika-mimetypes.xml file already has an
>> entry which contains the afm and pfb file types.
>>
>>  <mime-type type="application/x-font-type1">
>>   <glob pattern="*.pfa"/>
>>   <glob pattern="*.pfb"/>
>>   <glob pattern="*.pfm"/>
>>   <glob pattern="*.afm"/>
>>  </mime-type>
>>
>
> I have a feeling that .pfa and .pbf are the fonts themselves, and the .pfm
> and .afm files are metadata about them. Can anyone confirm? If so, we should
> split this entry into two
>
>
>
>  Both seem to work, at least for the .pfb files, which brings me to my next
>> question. I have about 9 different .afm files which I downloaded from an
>> Adobe site. When I run tika on these files one is recognized appropriately
>> ("x-font-type1" in the original version and "x-font-afm" in the updated
>> version), but the rest are only recognized as "text/plain". I haven't
>> really
>> added a real parser, I basically copied the one from the tutorial and
>> changed the supported type to be the corresponding mime type.
>>
>
> The detection is separate from the parser. I wouldn't expect you to have
> some detected but others not, my best guess is perhaps you have the old
> mimetype file around somewhere?
>
>
> When you get your font parser working, it would be great if you could post
> it to JIRA as an enhancement to Tika!
>
> Nick
>

Reply via email to