MKIV, fonts, confusion

afsmith

13 May 2009 13 May '09

7:18 a.m.

Hi ntg-context. I'm very confused about accomplishing something that to me seems as though it should be quite simple, but has proven for weeks of occasional attempts to be very confusing. I'm finding existing information from the contextgarden wiki and ntg-context archives to be very newbie-unfriendly and inconsistent. I'm compelled to improve the wiki, if only I could comprehend what I would be documenting. What I would like to do is use the full range of TeX-Gyre fonts (and later possibly others) for my existing documents. It is not clear to me... Whether or not I am using MKIV, nor how to determine which engine I am running. If not running MKIV/XeTeX, how to determine which fonts are installed. What the items from the output of "fc-list" or "mtxrun --script fonts --list" correspond to. How to use available fonts, nor where to draw valid parameters from for use in font commands. How to determine what font configurations are available for a given font. Whether I need to write typescripts, nor how to find any existing ones. Whether I need to concern myself with .map or any other font files. Whether I need to configure anything, move any files, etcetera. ...As well as anything else I might need to install or use a font For what it's worth, I have been using the command "texexec" to process my tex files, am using a context minimals downloaded about two months ago, and am running Linux.

Show replies by date

luigi scarso

13 May 13 May

7:29 a.m.

As a reference, I start from http://meeting.contextgarden.net/2008/talks/2008-08-24-taco-typescripts/libe... Also http://context.aanhet.net/svn/contextman/context-reference/en/co-fonts.pdf and http://context.aanhet.net/svn/contextman/context-reference/en/co-typography.... and look into base/* (yes egrep is you friend) For what it's worth, I have been using the command "texexec" to

...

process my tex files, am using a context minimals downloaded about two months ago, and am running Linux.

I'm on linux too and I use only mkiv ie luatex + context I always compile with $>context Keep in mind that mkiv is beta ... -- luigi

Wolfgang Schuster

8:36 a.m.

Am 13.05.2009 um 15:29 schrieb luigi scarso:

...

As a reference, I start from http://meeting.contextgarden.net/2008/talks/2008-08-24-taco-typescripts/libe...

Also http://context.aanhet.net/svn/contextman/context-reference/en/co-fonts.pdf and http://context.aanhet.net/svn/contextman/context-reference/en/co-typography....

and look into base/* (yes egrep is you friend)

There is also a simpler way: http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/simplefonts/ :) Wolfgang

luigi scarso

8:48 a.m.

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 4:36 PM, Wolfgang Schuster < schuster.wolfgang@googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Am 13.05.2009 um 15:29 schrieb luigi scarso:

As a reference,

...
I start from

http://meeting.contextgarden.net/2008/talks/2008-08-24-taco-typescripts/libe...

Also http://context.aanhet.net/svn/contextman/context-reference/en/co-fonts.pdf and

http://context.aanhet.net/svn/contextman/context-reference/en/co-typography....

and look into base/* (yes egrep is you friend)

There is also a simpler way: http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/simplefonts/ :)

still no arrived there..... -- luigi

Wolfgang Schuster

9:36 a.m.

Am 13.05.2009 um 16:48 schrieb luigi scarso:

...

...
There is also a simpler way: http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/ simplefonts/ :)

still no arrived there.....

I'm sorry but what do you mean? Wolfgang

luigi scarso

9:51 a.m.

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 5:36 PM, Wolfgang Schuster < schuster.wolfgang@googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Am 13.05.2009 um 16:48 schrieb luigi scarso:

There is also a simpler way: http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/simplefonts/ :)

...
...
still no arrived there.....

I'm sorry but what do you mean?

ah ,bad english I mean: I have not look at simplefonts as I want -- I planned to use it for an article on felltypes for arstexnica -- luigi

Wolfgang Schuster

10:27 a.m.

Am 13.05.2009 um 17:51 schrieb luigi scarso:

...

I have not look at simplefonts as I want -- I planned to use it for an article on felltypes for arstexnica

You fixed the problem with the felltype fonts? Wolfgang

luigi scarso

14 May 14 May

1:34 a.m.

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Wolfgang Schuster < schuster.wolfgang@googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Am 13.05.2009 um 17:51 schrieb luigi scarso:

I have not look at simplefonts as I want -- I planned

...
to use it for an article on felltypes for arstexnica

You fixed the problem with the felltype fonts?

No, maybe this weekend I will able to investigate a bit more . The problem is the follow: pdf make with felltypes and mkiv looks ugly in AdobeReader9 ---but not in xpdf with latest freetype -- because of a unsual em size. If you install the fonts in OpenOffice, the same document looks ok. $>pdffonts felltype.pdf name type emb sub uni object ID ------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- --------- PDPWHW+LMRoman12-Regular CID Type 0C yes yes yes 4 0 DUTOMC+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman CID Type 0C yes yes yes 5 0 $>pdffonts felltype_oo.pdf name type emb sub uni object ID ------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- --------- FTLUYL+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman Type 1C yes yes no 8 0 FTLUYL+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman Type 1C So I don't understand how OO "transform" this opentype in a Type1 , and if is it possible to do the same thing in mkiv. -- luigi

Taco Hoekwater

3:11 a.m.

luigi scarso wrote:

...

$>pdffonts felltype.pdf name type emb sub uni object ID ------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- --------- PDPWHW+LMRoman12-Regular CID Type 0C yes yes yes 4 0 DUTOMC+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman CID Type 0C yes yes yes 5 0

$>pdffonts felltype_oo.pdf name type emb sub uni object ID ------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- --------- FTLUYL+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman Type 1C yes yes no 8 0 FTLUYL+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman Type 1C

So I don't understand how OO "transform" this opentype in a Type1 ,

I guess that that is not hard when a document uses no more than 256 glyphs from the font. Can you experiment a bit and see what happens if you use more of them?

...

and if is it possible to do the same thing in mkiv.

No. Best wishes, Taco

luigi scarso

3:26 a.m.

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:11 AM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

...

luigi scarso wrote:

...
$>pdffonts felltype.pdf name type emb sub uni object

ID

...
------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- ---

...
PDPWHW+LMRoman12-Regular CID Type 0C yes yes yes 4 0 DUTOMC+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman CID Type 0C yes yes yes 5 0

$>pdffonts felltype_oo.pdf name type emb sub uni object ID ------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- ---

...
FTLUYL+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman Type 1C yes yes no 8 0 FTLUYL+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman Type 1C

So I don't understand how OO "transform" this opentype in a Type1 ,

I guess that that is not hard when a document uses no more than 256 glyphs from the font.

yes, a sort of creation of font encodings at fly for more than 256 glyphs -- but why ? Also, does it fix em size, given that this appears to be the root of the problem ?

...

Can you experiment a bit and see what happens if you use more of them?

yes ,if I have time this weekend -- volunteer welcome, of course.

-- luigi

Taco Hoekwater

3:34 a.m.

luigi scarso wrote:

...

> So I don't understand how OO "transform" this opentype in a Type1 ,

I guess that that is not hard when a document uses no more than 256 glyphs from the font.

yes, a sort of creation of font encodings at fly for more than 256 glyphs -- but why ?

Maybe to get around that bug^H^H^Hfeature in AR8 and AR9 that causes distress in mkiv, but more likely is that they believed the reencoding to Type1c was easier to handle than dealing with CID fonts.

...

Also, does it fix em size, given that this appears to be the root of the problem ?

No, it fixes nothing. It just works around the issue. The cause of the problem is that AR8 and AR9 *require* Type0 fonts to have 1000 units/em, otherwise the glyph drawing routine outputs an incorrectly scaled object. There is no such limitation for Type1C fonts, and that is why it works ok there (at least for now, who knows what AR10 will bring ...) Best wishes, Taco

luigi scarso

3:48 a.m.

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

...

luigi scarso wrote:

...
> So I don't understand how OO "transform" this opentype in a Type1 ,

I guess that that is not hard when a document uses no more than 256 glyphs from the font.

yes, a sort of creation of font encodings at fly for more than 256 glyphs -- but why ?

Maybe to get around that bug^H^H^Hfeature in AR8 and AR9

it's a bug of AR8 and AR9 , IMHO . AR7 shows it ok; AR5 says it's a broken pdf .

...

...
Also, does it fix em size, given that this appears to be the root of the problem ?

No, it fixes nothing. It just works around the issue. The cause of the problem is that AR8 and AR9 *require* Type0 fonts to have 1000 units/em, otherwise the glyph drawing routine outputs an incorrectly scaled object. There is no such limitation for Type1C fonts, and that is why it works ok there (at least for now, who knows what AR10 will bring ...)

And aren't we able to do the same trick -- even with a lots of unreadable macros -- in luatex ? -- luigi

Taco Hoekwater

3:56 a.m.

luigi scarso wrote:

...

And aren't we able to do the same trick -- even with a lots of unreadable macros -- in luatex ?

No, it needs engine support which is not present. Fastest solution: open the font in fontforge and fix the units, save under a different name, and use that font instead. Best wishes, Taco

luigi scarso

4:12 a.m.

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

...

luigi scarso wrote:

...
And aren't we able to do the same trick -- even with a lots of unreadable macros -- in luatex ?

No, it needs engine support which is not present. Fastest solution: open the font in fontforge and fix the units, save under a different name, and use that font instead.

arthur told me that can arise rounding errors. I should try to convert to Type1 instead -- luigi

Wolfgang Schuster

4:39 a.m.

Am 14.05.2009 um 12:12 schrieb luigi scarso:

...

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

...
No, it needs engine support which is not present. Fastest solution: open the font in fontforge and fix the units, save under a different name, and use that font instead.

arthur told me that can arise rounding errors. I should try to convert to Type1 instead

when i convert the to TT format i get a correct output Wolfgang

Arthur Reutenauer

5:21 a.m.

...

when i convert the to TT format i get a correct output

If Luigi is concerned with rounding errors, he shouldn't do that: while the coordinates of the points on the curve wouldn't change, all the control points would need to be recalculated due to the conversion from cubic to quadratic splines. On the other hand, if you keep CFF outlines and reset the units per em size from 2048 to 1000, you're of course exposed to rounding errors, but all the original points are retained, both points on the curve and control points -- thus it's much less error-prone, in my opinion. Arthur

Taco Hoekwater

5:38 a.m.

Arthur Reutenauer wrote:

...

...
when i convert the to TT format i get a correct output

If Luigi is concerned with rounding errors, he shouldn't do that: while the coordinates of the points on the curve wouldn't change, all the control points would need to be recalculated due to the conversion from cubic to quadratic splines. On the other hand, if you keep CFF outlines and reset the units per em size from 2048 to 1000, you're of course exposed to rounding errors, but all the original points are retained, both points on the curve and control points -- thus it's much less error-prone, in my opinion.

Rounding errors are not that important in this case, and there are downsides to both (o3->o2 touches *only* control points, so in some sense it is more precise than upm change). What's normally more important is that if you convert to ttf, you will loose all hinting information. Best wishes, Taco

Arthur Reutenauer

5:50 a.m.

...

Rounding errors are not that important in this case, and there are downsides to both (o3->o2 touches *only* control points, so in some sense it is more precise than upm change).

True, you can see it that way, too. We really need Karel Píška here :-)

...

What's normally more important is that if you convert to ttf, you will loose all hinting information.

Right. Arthur

luigi scarso

5:48 p.m.

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Wolfgang Schuster < schuster.wolfgang@googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Am 14.05.2009 um 12:12 schrieb luigi scarso:

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Taco Hoekwater

...
wrote:

No, it needs engine support which is not present. Fastest solution:

...
open the font in fontforge and fix the units, save under a different name, and use that font instead.

arthur told me that can arise rounding errors. I should try to convert to Type1 instead

when i convert the to TT format i get a correct output

yes, but there is also an original ttf version -- they works ok , of course . -- luigi

Wolfgang Schuster

15 May 15 May

12:18 a.m.

Am 15.05.2009 um 01:48 schrieb luigi scarso:

...

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 12:39 PM, Wolfgang Schuster < schuster.wolfgang@googlemail.com> wrote:

...
when i convert the to TT format i get a correct output

yes, but there is also an original ttf version -- they works ok , of course.

you wrote this before and i used now the ttf version in the example i sent you offlist. Wolfgang

Arthur Reutenauer

14 May 14 May

5:08 a.m.

...

arthur told me that can arise rounding errors.

You have to remember I used to be a mathematician. I say things that are meant to be true, not meant to be helpful :-) If you want to be sure that LuaTeX's output looks right in the most recent versions of Adobe Reader, editing the font is the way to go (although there might be license issues with commercial fonts). Of course conversion is not perfect, but you can't have it both way! Besides, the metrics won't change if you only modify upm; only the outlines do.

...

I should try to convert to Type1 instead

That should indeed work if you don't need more than 256 glyphs in the font (are you *sure* you don't?). Arthur -- Student: I'm new at this university, and I'm lost. Can you tell me where I am? Professor, after a 1- or 2-minute pause: You're in my office. Student: Oh, I see. I'm in the math department. Professor: Yes! How did you guess? Student: That's easy: 1. You thought your answer over thorougly. 2. The facts you stated are exactly true. 3. They don't help me at all!

luigi scarso

6:27 a.m.

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:08 PM, Arthur Reutenauer < arthur.reutenauer@normalesup.org> wrote:

...

...
arthur told me that can arise rounding errors.

You have to remember I used to be a mathematician. I say things that are meant to be true, not meant to be helpful :-)

If you want to be sure that LuaTeX's output looks right in the most recent versions of Adobe Reader, editing the font is the way to go (although there might be license issues with commercial fonts). Of course conversion is not perfect, but you can't have it both way! Besides, the metrics won't change if you only modify upm; only the outlines do.

...
I should try to convert to Type1 instead

That should indeed work if you don't need more than 256 glyphs in the font (are you *sure* you don't?).

Arthur

what I mean is: chose an encoding convert otf to type1 as is, make a pdf with mkiv check if it's ok. It's only for experiment , of course: Fell type come with a native ttf edition which is OK (or better, really OK), and one should chose this one to avoid any problems (so eventually I can compare pdfs ). -- luigi

luigi scarso

3:03 a.m.

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Wolfgang Schuster < schuster.wolfgang@googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Am 13.05.2009 um 17:51 schrieb luigi scarso:

I have not look at simplefonts as I want -- I planned

...
to use it for an article on felltypes for arstexnica

You fixed the problem with the felltype fonts?

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Wolfgang Schuster < schuster.wolfgang@googlemail.com> wrote:

...

Am 13.05.2009 um 17:51 schrieb luigi scarso:

I have not look at simplefonts as I want -- I planned

...
to use it for an article on felltypes for arstexnica

You fixed the problem with the felltype fonts?

Khaled Hosny

5:49 a.m.

On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:03:10AM +0200, luigi scarso wrote:

...

$>pdffonts felltype.pdf name type emb sub uni object ID ------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- --------- PDPWHW+LMRoman12-Regular CID Type 0C yes yes yes 4 0 DUTOMC+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman CID Type 0C yes yes yes 5 0

$>pdffonts felltype_oo.pdf name type emb sub uni object ID ------------------------------------ ----------------- --- --- --- --------- FTLUYL+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman Type 1C yes yes no 8 0 FTLUYL+IM_FELL_Double_Pica_PRO_Roman Type 1C

So I don't understand how OO "transform" this opentype in a Type1 , and if is it possible to do the same thing in mkiv.

Not only OOo, InDesign does that too, moreover, someone said even if LuaTeX (XeTeX too) output looked OK in Adobe reader 7, the print isn't OK. -- Khaled Hosny Arabic localiser and member of Arabeyes.org team Free font developer

Arthur Reutenauer

6:10 a.m.

...

Not only OOo, InDesign does that too, moreover, someone said even if LuaTeX (XeTeX too) output looked OK in Adobe reader 7, the print isn't OK.

On what printer? It's probably a bug in the driver, too. LuaTeX does exactly according to specification, I discussed this strategy with Taco years ago. I suppose XeTeX does conform, too, and it came to that arrangement independently. It's really sad that Adobe does not conform to its own specifications. Arthur

Hans Hagen

13 May 13 May

7:32 a.m.

afsmith wrote:

...

Hi ntg-context.

I'm very confused about accomplishing something that to me seems as though it should be quite simple, but has proven for weeks of occasional attempts to be very confusing. I'm finding existing information from the contextgarden wiki and ntg-context archives to be very newbie-unfriendly and inconsistent. I'm compelled to improve the wiki, if only I could comprehend what I would be documenting.

What I would like to do is use the full range of TeX-Gyre fonts (and later possibly others) for my existing documents. It is not clear to me... Whether or not I am using MKIV, nor how to determine which engine I am running. If not running MKIV/XeTeX, how to determine which fonts are installed. What the items from the output of "fc-list" or "mtxrun --script fonts --list" correspond to. How to use available fonts, nor where to draw valid parameters from for use in font commands. How to determine what font configurations are available for a given font. Whether I need to write typescripts, nor how to find any existing ones. Whether I need to concern myself with .map or any other font files. Whether I need to configure anything, move any files, etcetera. ....As well as anything else I might need to install or use a font

For what it's worth, I have been using the command "texexec" to process my tex files, am using a context minimals downloaded about two months ago, and am running Linux.

it depends on you language ... the main complication with fonts is that in traditional tex there are only 256 slots in a font available also, fonts relate to hyphenation another complication is that traditional tex fonts come in design sizes and yet another one is that we have math and also in traditional tex fonts it vs sl so, this is why a traditional tex font system is somewhat complex because it operates on several exis now, for english you can ignore encoding issues but not for other languages using the gyre fonts is not that complex as one of the objectives of the project is to provide consistent sets of fonts \usetypescript[palatino][ec] % pdftex, one needs to choose an encoding \usetypescript[palatino] % luatex, no encoding since unicode and then \setupbodyfont[palatino] should for instance give you palatino things like open type features etc etc demand some more knowledge as fonts differ considerably in this areas as well as can contain bugs or inconsistencies if you ever have to use commercial fonts .. be prepared ... an even bigger mess is awaiting you since naming of files and fonts is often quite strange ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------

afsmith

10:31 a.m.

Luigi, Hans, and Wolfgang, thank you for your responses. I'm still unclear on several things. (comments on your responses follow afterwards) Let me try asking these things as questions. Specifically, could someone please tell me... 1. How do I determine whether I am using MKII, MKIV, or XeTeX to process my documents? 2. Given the line from a typescript... \definefontsynonym[LiberationSerif] [name:liberationserif] ... how do I determine which file "name:liberationserif" corresponds to? 3. In both MKII and MKIV, how can I determine which typescripts exist? In other words, how do I determine working arguments for "\usetypescriptfile"? 3b. Specifically, in the case of... \usetypescript[palatino][ec] ... in which typescript is this defined? (given a vanilla context minimals installation) 4. What defines the output of "fc-list" or "mtxrun --script fonts --list"? Do they correspond to files? Type synonyms? etc. 5. Do I need to bother with map files for MKII? 6. Is it particularly recommended that I use MKIV? How stable is it compared to MKII? Luigi, what do you mean by "and look into base/*"? Which 'base'? Are you talking about in the context minimals distribution? some specific online repository? I have seen the two documents you mentioned. Re-reading them has clarified things a little bit. Wolfgang, Currently the module you linked to (http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/simplefonts/) is beyond my understanding... I would first like to understand the mechanism your module operates on before trying to automate it. Hans, I am aware that there are such types of parameters that must be defined for fonts. I understand 'it is complicated' but this does not really help make things clearer to me. The inner workings of fonts are of little concern to me to me at the moment. Right now I do not even know where to look. I have seen the examples you gave for palatino, such as... \usetypescript[palatino][ec] ...but I have no idea where those arguments come from Thanks. On 5/13/09, afsmith wrote: ...

...

What I would like to do is use the full range of TeX-Gyre fonts (and later possibly others) for my existing documents. It is not clear to me... Whether or not I am using MKIV, nor how to determine which engine I am running. If not running MKIV/XeTeX, how to determine which fonts are installed. What the items from the output of "fc-list" or "mtxrun --script fonts --list" correspond to. How to use available fonts, nor where to draw valid parameters from for use in font commands. How to determine what font configurations are available for a given font. Whether I need to write typescripts, nor how to find any existing ones. Whether I need to concern myself with .map or any other font files. Whether I need to configure anything, move any files, etcetera. ...As well as anything else I might need to install or use a font

For what it's worth, I have been using the command "texexec" to process my tex files, am using a context minimals downloaded about two months ago, and am running Linux.

Hans Hagen

10:47 a.m.

afsmith wrote:

...

Luigi, Hans, and Wolfgang, thank you for your responses. I'm still unclear on several things. (comments on your responses follow afterwards)

Let me try asking these things as questions. Specifically, could someone please tell me... 1. How do I determine whether I am using MKII, MKIV, or XeTeX to process my documents?

\doifmode {mkiv} { ... } \ifnum\texengine=\xetexengine .. \fi mkiv only run son top of luatex (and the context command replaces texexec there)

...

2. Given the line from a typescript... \definefontsynonym[LiberationSerif] [name:liberationserif] .... how do I determine which file "name:liberationserif" corresponds to?

not relevant since name will sort that out (given that the name is ok)

...

3. In both MKII and MKIV, how can I determine which typescripts exist? In other words, how do I determine working arguments for "\usetypescriptfile"?

by looking at the file, but at some point i expect users to switch to mkiv so if mkiv works for your document, then forget about mkii

...

3b. Specifically, in the case of... \usetypescript[palatino][ec] .... in which typescript is this defined? (given a vanilla context minimals installation)

that one in type-one (type one font)

...

4. What defines the output of "fc-list" or "mtxrun --script fonts --list"? Do they correspond to files? Type synonyms? etc.

mkiv does not use fc-list and as fc-list does not work on my machine i have no clue

...

5. Do I need to bother with map files for MKII?

normally the typescript handles that

...

6. Is it particularly recommended that I use MKIV? How stable is it compared to MKII?

depends on your document; currently somewhat in flux due to reimplementing structure but that will stabelize

...

Luigi, what do you mean by "and look into base/*"? Which 'base'? Are you talking about in the context minimals distribution? some specific online repository? I have seen the two documents you mentioned. Re-reading them has clarified things a little bit.

tex/context/base

...

Wolfgang, Currently the module you linked to (http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/simplefonts/) is beyond my understanding... I would first like to understand the mechanism your module operates on before trying to automate it.

Hans, I am aware that there are such types of parameters that must be defined for fonts. I understand 'it is complicated' but this does not really help make things clearer to me. The inner workings of fonts are of little concern to me to me at the moment. Right now I do not even know where to look. I have seen the examples you gave for palatino, such as... \usetypescript[palatino][ec] ....but I have no idea where those arguments come from

well, palatino is defined in type-one if ec makes no sense to you, then just use it (polish use qx, i use texnansi, etc ... it depends on the language you use and for english it hardly matters) ----------------------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------

Wolfgang Schuster

11:23 a.m.

Am 13.05.2009 um 18:31 schrieb afsmith:

...

Wolfgang, Currently the module you linked to (http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/simplefonts/) is beyond my understanding... I would first like to understand the mechanism your module operates on before trying to automate it.

My module simplifies the use of fonts in MkIV and is similar to the fontspec package for LaTeX but has one feature which is not available in fontspec. Here is a example: When you wan to use the Delicious fonts [1] from exljbris you need a typescript which assigns each font to a certain style (upright, italic, bold ...), you can see the complete typescript for the Delicious font on the wiki [2]. When you use my module you don't have to create a typescript (this done by the module when you select a font), you need only the \set<xxx>font commands to set the fonts for the families (serif, sans and mono). The setup for the delicious fonts is: \usemodule[simplefonts] % load the module \setmainfont[Delicious] % set Delicious as main (serif) font \starttext \rm\tf roman \it italic \bf bold \bi bolditalic \sc smallcaps \stoptext [1] http://www.josbuivenga.demon.nl/delicious.html [2] http://wiki.contextgarden.net/CD_Booklet#Use_Delicious_OTF_font_with_luatex_... BTW: ConTeXt ships with complete typescripts for Mac (type-mac.tex) and Windows (type-win.tex) fonts, more typescripts can be found at http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/typescripts/. Wolfgang

Aditya Mahajan

2:23 p.m.

On Wed, 13 May 2009, afsmith wrote:

...

Luigi, Hans, and Wolfgang, thank you for your responses. I'm still unclear on several things. (comments on your responses follow afterwards)

Let me try asking these things as questions. Specifically, could someone please tell me... 1. How do I determine whether I am using MKII, MKIV, or XeTeX to process my documents?

Depends on how you process your documents. texexec filename => pdftex engine (mkii) texexec --pdf filename => pdftex engine (mkii) texexec --xtx filename => xetex engine (mkii) texexec --lua filename => luatex engine (mkiv) context filename => luatex engine (mkiv)

...

2. Given the line from a typescript... \definefontsynonym[LiberationSerif] [name:liberationserif] ... how do I determine which file "name:liberationserif" corresponds to?

mtxrun --script font --list "*liberation*" On my machine this gives liberationmonobold Liberation Mono Bold /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationMono-Bold.ttf liberationmonobolditalic Liberation Mono Bold Italic /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationMono-BoldItalic.ttf liberationmonoitalic Liberation Mono Italic /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationMono-Italic.ttf liberationmonoregular Liberation Mono Regular /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationMono-Regular.ttf liberationsansbold Liberation Sans Bold /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationSans-Bold.ttf liberationsansbolditalic Liberation Sans Bold Italic /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationSans-BoldItalic.ttf liberationsansitalic Liberation Sans Italic /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationSans-Italic.ttf liberationsansregular Liberation Sans Regular /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationSans-Regular.ttf liberationserifbold Liberation Serif Bold /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationSerif-Bold.ttf liberationserifbolditalic Liberation Serif Bold Italic /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationSerif-BoldItalic.ttf liberationserifitalic Liberation Serif Italic /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationSerif-Italic.ttf liberationserifregular Liberation Serif Regular /usr/share/fonts/TTF/LiberationSerif-Regular.ttf

...

3. In both MKII and MKIV, how can I determine which typescripts exist? In other words, how do I determine working arguments for "\usetypescriptfile"?

ls $TEXMFCONTEXT/tex/context/base/type-*

...

3b. Specifically, in the case of... \usetypescript[palatino][ec] ... in which typescript is this defined? (given a vanilla context minimals installation)

type-one.tex for mkii, type-otf.tex for mkiv.

...

4. What defines the output of "fc-list" or "mtxrun --script fonts --list"? Do they correspond to files? Type synonyms? etc.

mtxrun --script fonts lists fonts in $TEXMF/fonts/ and $OSFONTDIR.

...

5. Do I need to bother with map files for MKII?

No. Unless you want to create a typescript for font not present in the minimals and ctan.

...

6. Is it particularly recommended that I use MKIV? How stable is it compared to MKII?

Mkii is extremely stable and well tested. Mkiv is in a state of flux right now. If you do not need any of the features of luatex (opentype fonts, ease of programming, etc.) stay with mkii for the time being. If you want to use luatex features, then you have to use Mkiv :-) Aditya

Wolfgang Schuster

2:31 p.m.

Am 13.05.2009 um 22:23 schrieb Aditya Mahajan:

...

On Wed, 13 May 2009, afsmith wrote:

...
Let me try asking these things as questions. Specifically, could someone please tell me... 1. How do I determine whether I am using MKII, MKIV, or XeTeX to process my documents?

Depends on how you process your documents.

texexec filename => pdftex engine (mkii) texexec --pdf filename => pdftex engine (mkii) texexec --xtx filename => xetex engine (mkii) texexec --lua filename => luatex engine (mkiv) context filename => luatex engine (mkiv)

context --pdftex filename => pdftex engine (mkii) context --xetex filename => xetex engine (mkii) Wolfgang

Mohamed Bana

4:12 p.m.

if you don't require anything completex http://github.com/contextgarden/otfinstall/tree/master automates a lot of the tasks required in installing a font in mkii. afsmith wrote:

...

Luigi, Hans, and Wolfgang, thank you for your responses. I'm still unclear on several things. (comments on your responses follow afterwards)

Let me try asking these things as questions. Specifically, could someone please tell me... 1. How do I determine whether I am using MKII, MKIV, or XeTeX to process my documents?

I tend to use \begin{XETEX,OLDTEX,LUATEX} ... \end{XETEX,OLDTEX,LUATEX}

...

2. Given the line from a typescript... \definefontsynonym[LiberationSerif] [name:liberationserif] ... how do I determine which file "name:liberationserif" corresponds to? 3. In both MKII and MKIV, how can I determine which typescripts exist? In other words, how do I determine working arguments for "\usetypescriptfile"? 3b. Specifically, in the case of... \usetypescript[palatino][ec] ... in which typescript is this defined? (given a vanilla context minimals installation) 4. What defines the output of "fc-list" or "mtxrun --script fonts --list"? Do they correspond to files? Type synonyms? etc.

fc-list also looks in $HOME/.fonts/

...

5. Do I need to bother with map files for MKII? 6. Is it particularly recommended that I use MKIV? How stable is it compared to MKII?

Luigi, what do you mean by "and look into base/*"? Which 'base'? Are you talking about in the context minimals distribution? some specific online repository? I have seen the two documents you mentioned. Re-reading them has clarified things a little bit.

Wolfgang, Currently the module you linked to (http://bitbucket.org/wolfs/simplefonts/) is beyond my understanding... I would first like to understand the mechanism your module operates on before trying to automate it.

Hans, I am aware that there are such types of parameters that must be defined for fonts. I understand 'it is complicated' but this does not really help make things clearer to me. The inner workings of fonts are of little concern to me to me at the moment. Right now I do not even know where to look. I have seen the examples you gave for palatino, such as... \usetypescript[palatino][ec] ...but I have no idea where those arguments come from

Thanks.

On 5/13/09, afsmith wrote: ...

...
What I would like to do is use the full range of TeX-Gyre fonts (and later possibly others) for my existing documents. It is not clear to me... Whether or not I am using MKIV, nor how to determine which engine I am running. If not running MKIV/XeTeX, how to determine which fonts are installed. What the items from the output of "fc-list" or "mtxrun --script fonts --list" correspond to. How to use available fonts, nor where to draw valid parameters from for use in font commands. How to determine what font configurations are available for a given font. Whether I need to write typescripts, nor how to find any existing ones. Whether I need to concern myself with .map or any other font files. Whether I need to configure anything, move any files, etcetera. ...As well as anything else I might need to install or use a font

For what it's worth, I have been using the command "texexec" to process my tex files, am using a context minimals downloaded about two months ago, and am running Linux.

If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________

5541

Age (days ago)

5543

Last active (days ago)

List overview

Download

31 comments

9 participants

participants (9)

Aditya Mahajan
afsmith
Arthur Reutenauer
Hans Hagen
Khaled Hosny
luigi scarso
Mohamed Bana
Taco Hoekwater
Wolfgang Schuster