[Fontinst] ITC Galliard CC - ff, ffi & ffl ligatures

[Christopher Adams]

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you all. You've been
extraordinarily helpful and patient with my questions!


Lars, I must not understand how to use your code. Do I put that in an .etx
file like {t1fglalt.etx} and call it instead of t1? Like this:

\installfont{fglr8t}{fglr8r,fglra,newlatin}{t1fglalt}{T1}{fgl}{m}{n}{}

The script then halts with the error:

Reglyphed metrics written on fglria.mtx.
(./fglr8r.mtx) (./fglra.mtx)
(/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/fontinst/latinmtx/newlatin.mtx
(/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/fontinst/latinmtx/llbuild.mtx
(/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/fontinst/latinmtx/ltcmds.mtx))
(/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/fontinst/latinmtx/lubuild.mtx)
(/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/fontinst/latinmtx/lsbuild.mtx)
(/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/fontinst/latinmtx/lsfake.mtx)
(/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/fontinst/latinmtx/lsmisc.mtx)
(/usr/share/texmf-texlive/tex/fontinst/latinmtx/ltpunct.mtx))
(./t1fglalt.etx
! Extra \fi.
l.1 \encoding

Even if I comment out all of the \nextslot and \setslot commands, the error
is the same. How should I be using your code?

- - christopher

2009/4/28 Lars Hellström <Lars.Hellstrom at residenset.net>

> Christopher Adams skrev:
>
>> If I want to make use of these ligatures, I need to reglyph them with
>> unique
>> names, write a new .etx file with the new names and the right rules,
>> process
>> these and then add the result to {fglr8t}? I see that I can't accomplish
>> this with the single line that is now giving me the ff, ffl & ffi
>> ligatures.
>>
>
> You need an ETX putting fj in some slot, and to use it instead of t1.etx
> for defining the wanted encoding of the virtual font. You could probably
> have one that goes
>
> \encoding
> \relax
>
> \setint{ligaturing}{-2}
> \inputetx{t1}
>
> \nextslot{73}
> \setslot{I}\endsetslot
>
> \nextslot{99}
> \setslot{c}\endsetslot
>
> \nextslot{102}
> \setslot{f}
>  \ligature{LIG}{f}{ff}
>  \ligature{LIG}{i}{fi}
>  \ligature{LIG}{j}{fj}
>  \ligature{LIG}{l}{fl}
> \endsetslot
>
> \nextslot{105}
> \setslot{i}\endsetslot
>
> \nextslot{115}
> \setslot{s}\endsetslot
>
> \nextslot{156}
> \setslot{fj}\endsetslot
>
> \nextslot{27}
> \setslot{ff}
>   \ligature{LIG}{i}{ffi}
>   \ligature{LIG}{l}{ffl}
> \endsetslot
>
> \setslot{fi}
> \endsetslot
>
> \setslot{fl}
> \endsetslot
>
> \setslot{ffi}
> \endsetslot
>
> \setslot{ffl}
> \endsetslot
>
> \endencoding
>
> (Untested, so there may be typos.) For simplicity I've assumed \lc, \lclig,
> \uc, etc. all have their default values; see t1.etx for how they are used
> there.
>
> Since all glyphs you want from the Alt fonts seem to be in a slot already,
> you don't need to make an ETX to reencode that.





>
>
>  On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 8:03 PM, Plamen Tanovski <pgt at arcor.de> wrote:
>>
>>  The ff, ffl & ffi ligatures are encoded on the OldStyle fonts as cedilla,
>>>> hungarumlaut & ogonek, respectively.
>>>>
>>> Madness. This means, all composite characters with those accents
>>> nonexistent in the font should be removed.
>>>
>>>
>> Yes, I had noticed this when I first got my hands on the typeface, and was
>> testing out the glyphs by outputting all possible values of \char. These
>> ligatures were being composited as if they were diacritical marks. This is
>> only true of the OldStyle-Roman. The plain Roman doesn't have any strange
>> encodings.
>>
>
> The \reglyphfont approach is superior in this aspect, since it doesn't just
> define the glyphs under their proper names but also doesn't define them
> under incorrect names.
>
>  ITC Galliard was first issued in 1992. I believe the method of encoding
>> assumes that typesetters will switch fonts manually when they want access
>> to
>> alternate glyphs.
>>
>
> In part, yes, but some (most?) popular font editors back then didn't care
> much about the glyph names either; you typically arranged glyphs by slot and
> got the name that (according to the default encoding) belonged in that slot.
> Since the typical word processor on top of the OS's graphics and printing
> libraries never bothered with glyph names, most users never noticed things
> were broken.
>
> Lars Hellström
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://tug.org/pipermail/fontinst/attachments/20090428/34f1bc86/attachment-0001.html