On 20-2-2010 5:06, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
I don't know how Hans' metric files look like, but: - texfont --ve=yandy ... doesn't do anything here - texfont --ve=bh ... creates a bunch of files, however *not* the T1 files which are of crucial importance to me; T1 (=ec) is only supported via virtual fonts. (And even then the character looks just about terrible, but still better than not having it at all.)
afaik originally yand only shipped texnansi metrics however, in context we have this texnansi-* naming scheme and for a while (as i used lucida often) i shipped the texnansi-* metrics now, when yandy went out of business and tug took over, things changed and as the original tfm (math) metrics were no longer shipped we ended up in some deadlock: context supported the original fonts (present on machines of users) while tug didn't ship those 8 tfm files needed for math so, at that point i simply gave up on lucida (i had my own texnansi-* + original math tfm files) as changing context would break existing lucida usage interesting is that the lucida metrics (afaik) are not shipped with tex live so we cannot create a robust solution unless we ship with the minimale: for mkiv (luatex): - afm files (for mkiv) - map file (can be small one) - only some 8 math tfm files for mkiv for mkii: - map file - tfm files (dunno which ones) - vf files (dunno which ones) for mkiv i already adapted the typescripts (in beta), for mkii we need different mappings
I have fixed the typescripts, so that one doesn't need to generate any additional files apart from those present on CTAN (and we can also add them to minimals, but it might be nice to cooperate with Hans first to prevent any name clashes). I'll send the typescripts once I figure out some problems, but:
ok, alternatively we could ship the texnansi-* and ec-* variants but who cares
1.) Hans, why does \definefontsynonym [LucidaBright] [file:hlhr.pfb] fail with the message below? (I can send a complete example off-list.) How does one use pfb fonts then? Anyway, \definefontsynonym [LucidaBright] [name:LucidaBright] works fine, so that's ok for now. Using the accents in XeTeX would require extra tricks anyway, so concentrating on pdftex and luatex seems reasonable.
i have no clue ... but best test with the latest beta also, i did a fix in math-vfu (extra nil check) as some shapes seem to be missing even if it works, luatex can quit whem embedding the file (buglet) but that has been fixed by taco yesterday
2.) When reading typescripts for mkii with mkiv ("ec" encoding that is based on virtual fonts), I don't get any accent at all, not even š and ž that are part of texnansi encoding and are present in font. Why is that?
nu clue ... maybe because yandy only bothered about texnansi so we might as well stick to that
3.) When creating a devoted mkiv typescript, č is missing (and so are ćđ, but I can live without the two of them as long as Nino is not nearby :), however not being able to use č is a no-go for me.
again, maybe the font is not complete i'm a little surprised as i'd suppose those virtual fonts to be ok we can still consider to use the texnansi-* and ec-* variants (texfont generated)
I'll get to math later. At the moment I had to figure out how the files are organized and how to use them without having to depend on texfont.
lucida was always different but afaik tug now ships them in default tex math encoding so the math-lbr vector is useless now Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------