On Tuesday 11 March 2003 16:10, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 09:46 AM, Patrick Gundlach wrote:
Yes and no... ConTeXt is looking for fonts with names that are totally unusual compared to the ordinary TeX (LaTeX) System. Most TeX systems (and I guess GW TeX as well) support psnfss, the postscript font system to be used with latex. That means, that you should have fonts named in a cryptic way "pplr8r.tfm" or such. ConTeXt on the other hand looks for fontnames like "8r-uplr8a.tfm". Almost no one has a font named like this on their system.
This kind of thing is just silly. The above named file is no more clearly named than the psnfss version, so what's the point?
It is clearer: the first bit gives the encoding and the latter bit is the name of the file containign the glyphs (uplr8a.pfb). OTOH since LaTeX already creates a lot of font-mess, I do agree that there is no need to add more to the trouble already there. I would like to see a few sym-links (does Windows have something like that?) to add a few names to the tree to make sure everything works as planned. Since texfont uses afm2tfm directly (and the tfm files that come with psnfss are hand tuned) I don't think that using texfont blindly is a very good idea. It would be better to use the existing tfm files. The dvips documentation on aft2tfm lists what's been added to the tfm's in the psnfss collection, I cannot recall this right now. Cheers, Maarten Sneep