Patrick Gundlach wrote:
Hi Vit,
It is some kind of inconsistency/bug in the ec encoding: if there is equivalent /dcaron present, then trere should be /tcaron too instead /trightquote.
So, how do the fonts name the glyph?
looking to my font/afm directory: afm>grep -S -l "tcaron" *.afm | perl -n -e "$i=0;while(<>){$i++;}print\"$i\n\"" 761 afm>grep -S -l "tquoteright" *.afm | perl -n -e "$i=0;while(<>){$i++;}print\"$i\n\"" 69 but from these 69, 53 are from lm, and in lm these glyph is dubdled (both tcaron and tquoteright): lmr10.afm: C -1 ; WX 388.88889 ; N tquoteright ; B 19 -11 332 699 ; lmr10.afm: C -1 ; WX 388.88889 ; N tcaron ; B 19 -11 332 699 ; the rest 16 files are: 8x .\ibm\courier\*.afm and 8x .\ibm\times\*.afm even there are both glyphs but with different metrics grep -S "tcaron" cour.afm C -1 ; WX 600 ; N tcaron ; B 94 -14 538 720 ; CC tcaron 2 ; PCC t 0 0 ; PCC caron -77 92 ; grep -S "tquoteright" cour.afm C -1 ; WX 600 ; N tquoteright ; B 73 -14 646 563 ; So it seems that fonts are using /tcaron; lm use /tquoteright only for sure. Does anybody know who is responsibility/background for ec encoding? vit