Re: psnfss and lw35nfss

["Berthold K.P. Horn" <bkph@ai.mit.edu>]

   Concernant « Re: psnfss and lw35nfss », Berthold K.P. Horn écrit :

     > After all what are called `PostScript'
    > fonts on comp.text.tex are called `ATM fonts' in the rest of the
    > world, and while ATM provides better by far rasterization than any
    > PS interpreter - public domain or commercial - ATM does not include
    > a PS interpreter and so cannot handle `PS trickery'. 

   how would you call AJenson, then ? an ATM4+ font ? and MinionMM
   ATM3.02 font ? It was definitely not an ATM2 font. No doubt this
   dotlessj will be an ATM-300\varepsilon font!

I am not sure I get your point.  Like some things aren't supported by
PS level 1, does that mean something? Like level 2 is evil?

Also, ATM has no trouble with dotlessj if (1) the font has it 
and (2) the TeX system knows how to reencode the font on the fly.