<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Hi,<br>
<br>
the way I see it, we have two requirements:<br>
1) render embedded fonts correctly<br>
2) support (at least) the 14 pdf base fonts even if not embedded<br>
<br>
I think (1) is fulfilled by poppler/freetype automatically (the
Quartz vs. fontconfig issues only occur when setting up system fonts
as replacements, right?).<br>
<br>
As for (2), the Quartz approach satisfies this by using system
fonts, whereas fontconfig requires X11 fonts (which, however, seem
to have become a sort of system fonts in recent OS Xs, anyway; if
they don't - or there is a chance users don't have it - we should
probably bundle the necessary font files with Tw, just to ensure we
don't violate the PDF standard).<br>
<br>
Other than that, I don't think we have any strict requirements. In
particular, I don't think the PDF standard mentions any other than
the standard fonts anywhere (although I have to confess I haven't
read all the 1300 something pages ;)).<br>
So, it is certainly nice to have good replacements, but not
required. BTW: could it be that those fonts are available (and
recognized properly) on CJK systems, anyway, and it's only non-CJK
systems that require (and fail to find) suitable replacements?<br>
Likewise, the concern about fontconfig was that it can spam the file
system, but apparently in recent versions this is no longer the
case, either?<br>
<br>
So, all in all, I see two choices: bundle base-14 fonts (we do this
partly for Windows as well), or drop good font substitution.<br>
<br>
I would tend to go with fontconfig here, for reasons of simple
usability. But not being a Mac user this is nothing more than a gut
feeling.<br>
Have I missed something? Jonathan, any thoughts?<br>
<br>
<br>
On 2011-06-23 20:31, Charlie Sharpsteen wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:BANLkTikrvQ365dPiv-txE5e71eP-SXv_Wg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 11:25 AM, Charlie Sharpsteen <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:chuck@sharpsteen.net">chuck@sharpsteen.net</a>></span>
wrote:
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>Should strict interpretation of document fonts take
precedence over usability for non-english speakers?</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I suppose another approach would be to use Quartz for font
discovery, but then fall back on Fontconfig (if available) for
better fallback suggestions than "Helvetica".</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Or is that just crazy talk?</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
Do you mean "(if available)" in the sense of: if installed (as a
dynamic library of some sort) on the system?<br>
I guess bringing both systems to work together would be a lot of
work...<br>
<br>
-Stefan<br>
</body>
</html>