Re: [NTG-context] Using Postscript Type 1 fonts in ConTeXt/XeTeX?
Seems we never posted the conclusion about this problem: XeTeX simply doesn't work with the old Mac Type 1 Postscript fonts on Mac OS X (Leopard or before). The reason is that these old fonts store their data in the resource fork, which Unix utilities like XeTeX don't see. Only TrueType or OpenType fonts will be recognised and loaded correctly. PCs don't have the data fork so old Type 1 Postscript fonts for PCs (with .pfb extension) seem to work. Just copying these to the Mac is no solution, however, because Mac OS X does not support PC-style Type 1 fonts (only the Mac ones with the data in the resource fork), and therefore XeTeX will not find these fonts. Therefore the preferred solution is to use fonts of TrueType or OpenType varieties. For those with access to a font conversion program like fondu (?) fontforge (?) or fontlab (?) it may be possible to convert the old Type 1 font to TrueType or OpenType, reinstall it and have XeTeX work with it in that way.
Le 1 mars 08 à 13:19, Roland a écrit :
Seems we never posted the conclusion about this problem: XeTeX simply doesn't work with the old Mac Type 1 Postscript fonts on Mac OS X (Leopard or before). The reason is that these old fonts store their data in the resource fork, which Unix utilities like XeTeX don't see. Only TrueType or OpenType fonts will be recognised and loaded correctly.
PCs don't have the data fork so old Type 1 Postscript fonts for PCs (with .pfb extension) seem to work. Just copying these to the Mac is no solution, however, because Mac OS X does not support PC-style Type 1 fonts (only the Mac ones with the data in the resource fork), and therefore XeTeX will not find these fonts.
Therefore the preferred solution is to use fonts of TrueType or OpenType varieties. For those with access to a font conversion program like fondu (?) fontforge (?) or fontlab (?) it may be possible to convert the old Type 1 font to TrueType or OpenType, reinstall it and have XeTeX work with it in that way.
There is a command line utility called "fondu" to convert fonts between mac format and various other ones. It is available as an i-installer package, and somewhere else...
Some of your statements seem wrong or at least confusing to me: Am 2008-03-01 um 13:19 schrieb Roland:
Seems we never posted the conclusion about this problem: XeTeX simply doesn't work with the old Mac Type 1 Postscript fonts on Mac OS X (Leopard or before). The reason is that these old fonts store their data in the resource fork, which Unix utilities like XeTeX don't see. Only TrueType or OpenType fonts will be recognised and loaded correctly.
As you state later, all data fork fonts (TrueType, OpenType and PostScript) should work. For I never tried XeTeX I don't know if PS Type 1 and 3 will work. Isn't it possible to use traditional TeX-installed fonts with XeTeX?
PCs don't have the data fork
PCs don't know the Mac *resource* fork. BTW there are different forks *possible* with NTFS (supported from WinNT to XP, no more in Vista)!
For those with access to a font conversion program like fondu (?) fontforge (?) or fontlab (?) it may be possible to convert the old Type 1 font
fondu is by the same author as fontforge; look at http://fondu.sourceforge.net/ http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/ Greetlings from Lake Constance! Hraban --- http://www.fiee.net/texnique/ http://wiki.contextgarden.net https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer)
On Sun, Mar 2, 2008 at 8:37 PM, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
Some of your statements seem wrong or at least confusing to me:
Am 2008-03-01 um 13:19 schrieb Roland:
Seems we never posted the conclusion about this problem: XeTeX simply doesn't work with the old Mac Type 1 Postscript fonts on Mac OS X (Leopard or before). The reason is that these old fonts store their data in the resource fork, which Unix utilities like XeTeX don't see. Only TrueType or OpenType fonts will be recognised and loaded correctly.
As you state later, all data fork fonts (TrueType, OpenType and PostScript) should work. For I never tried XeTeX I don't know if PS Type 1 and 3 will work.
They do. But the mac Type1 fonts come in some weird format for which Jonathan hasn't written support in xdvipdfmx (yet). With xdv2pdf they work OK.
Isn't it possible to use traditional TeX-installed fonts with XeTeX?
Yes, it is. But the font that Roland has bought and is trying to use in XeTeX comes in two flavors: one for mac (that's the one he has) and one for Windows. The "traditional TeX-installed" fonts are in the format that Windows uses (another font, actually) and would not work in other Mac applications. He would actually need either: - the windows version of that font (which he doesn't have) - or a patch for XeTeX (xdvipdfmx actually) that would allow him to use the font he has (the patch *might* come one day, but there are more important things in XeTeX waiting to be implemented) - or to patch ConTeXt to use xdv2pdf instead of xdvipdfmx + rewrite a bunch of definitions that load Latin Modern (they should not be loaded since xdv2pdf doesn't support "traditional TeX-installed fonts") - or to convert the font to some other format (officially forbidden, I guess) The second problem is also that the syntax to call that font might need to be changed, but that's a minor problem. A story learned: it is possible, but any of the described ways is extremely clumsy to use, so one should better use another font to avoid problems. Mojca
Am 2008-03-03 um 17:44 schrieb Mojca Miklavec:
For I never tried XeTeX I don't know if PS Type 1 and 3 will work. They do. But the mac Type1 fonts come in some weird format for which Jonathan hasn't written support in xdvipdfmx (yet). With xdv2pdf they work OK.
As explained, that weird format is the traditional Mac resource fork font. MacOS "Classic" stored all executable stuff in the resource fork, besides icons etc.; the data fork of a font file ist just empty. This concept has its merits - you can edit a lot of resources, like GUI elements, messages, icons etc. with a resource editor. I completely reworked and translated the GUI of a program once ;-) That's not possible with normal Windows or other binaries. The application structure of OSX, inherited from NextStep, has similar features. I like to poke around in applications ;-)
Isn't it possible to use traditional TeX-installed fonts with XeTeX? Yes, it is. But the font that Roland has bought and is trying to use in XeTeX comes in two flavors: one for mac (that's the one he has) and one for Windows.
Of course, that's why I asked - I've a lot of "Windows" fonts installed in my texmf-local tree and I wouldn't like to enable them all for the OS (too much memory).
- or to patch ConTeXt to use xdv2pdf instead of xdvipdfmx + rewrite a bunch of definitions that load Latin Modern (they should not be loaded since xdv2pdf doesn't support "traditional TeX-installed fonts")
Since there are OpenType LM fonts now, one could just install them for the OS. BTW I'm just typesetting a magazine in InDesign with LMSans as body font (and Adobe Garamond Pro for the headlines).
- or to convert the font to some other format (officially forbidden, I guess)
normally it is, with commercial fonts Greetlings from Lake Constance! Hraban --- http://www.fiee.net/texnique/ http://wiki.contextgarden.net https://www.cacert.org (I'm an assurer)
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
Am 2008-03-03 um 17:44 schrieb Mojca Miklavec:
- or to patch ConTeXt to use xdv2pdf instead of xdvipdfmx + rewrite a bunch of definitions that load Latin Modern (they should not be loaded since xdv2pdf doesn't support "traditional TeX-installed fonts")
Since there are OpenType LM fonts now, one could just install them for the OS.
True. But there are to mechanisms to load fonts: by font name or by filename. By filename only works in xdvipdfmx and by font name requires the font to be installed (and thus cannot be made the default/cannot be expected from users). If there were enough requests, xdv2pdf could be made optional by: - providing an extra switch for texexec - providing an alternative that doesn't use Latin Modern by filename (which means either not loading OpenType LM at all or assuming that it's installed) I just didn't feel that it would be necessary to support that (didn't know the limitations of xdvipdfmx) when I was asking Hans to write patches. If there are requests to do it, it could probably be done. Mojca
On Tue, 4 Mar 2008 01:10:06 +0100
"Mojca Miklavec"
On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 8:58 PM, Henning Hraban Ramm wrote:
Am 2008-03-03 um 17:44 schrieb Mojca Miklavec:
- or to patch ConTeXt to use xdv2pdf instead of xdvipdfmx + rewrite a bunch of definitions that load Latin Modern (they should not be loaded since xdv2pdf doesn't support "traditional TeX-installed fonts")
Since there are OpenType LM fonts now, one could just install them for the OS.
True. But there are to mechanisms to load fonts: by font name or by filename. By filename only works in xdvipdfmx and by font name requires the font to be installed (and thus cannot be made the default/cannot be expected from users).
If there were enough requests, xdv2pdf could be made optional by: - providing an extra switch for texexec
IRC this is already possible on a Mac, "texexec --xtx" use dvipdfmx and "texexec --xetex" use xdv2pdf to convert the DVI file to PDF.
- providing an alternative that doesn't use Latin Modern by filename (which means either not loading OpenType LM at all or assuming that it's installed)
I just didn't feel that it would be necessary to support that (didn't know the limitations of xdvipdfmx) when I was asking Hans to write patches. If there are requests to do it, it could probably be done.
Wolfgang
participants (5)
-
Henning Hraban Ramm -
Jérome Laurens -
Mojca Miklavec -
Roland -
Wolfgang Schuster