On 12/21/06, James Cloos
"Hartmut" == Hartmut Henkel
writes: "Robin" == Robin Fairbairns writes: Hartmut> the 14 fonts listed in the PDF Reference that must be built Hartmut> into any decent PDF viewer, so it's not mandatory to embed Hartmut> them into PDF files. These are Times-Roman, Helvetica, Hartmut> Courier, ZapfDingbats [and Symbol].
Robin> unless we declare adobe reader no longer "decent", this Robin> definition doesn't work any more -- adobe only has minion and Robin> myriad in the distribution (plus, i think, courier).
[...] Even though it does not include any actual fonts named Times, TimesNewRoman, Helvetica or Arial it does know the fonts, can emulate them with its MM fonts, and can ouput postscript which calls the fonts by name w/o having to embed them (relying of course on the PS interpreters' ability to render said fonts).
That does seem sufficient to claim that it has those fonts (or their functional equivilent, just like xpdf/poppler/gs).
There are examples where the substitutions made by the various viewers
end up looking quite different. These days a well-travelled route to
confusion is to send your colleague a document created with a Windows
GUI tool that uses Arial-Italic when the author requests
Helvetica-Italic. Your colleague opens the file on her linux machine,
and sees the file rendered using the URW clone of Helvetica-Oblique.
In Arial-Italic, the vertical bar is upright, so the user sees no
reason to switch to normal "Helvetica" for the vertical bar symbol (on
linux the user would probably do this to see upright verticals), but
the URW clone has slanted verticals, so y=x|b renders more like y=x/b.
One of the problems with all the software being so helpful by
substituting for the Laserwiriter 35 fonts is that you no longer know
what was used when a document was created. People tell me "I always
use Helvetica" when they haven't been near a system that contains
a real Helvetica font.
--
George N. White III