xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alexander Kiel <alexanderk...@gmx.net>
Subject Re: State of OpenType Font Implementation
Date Tue, 15 Sep 2009 15:52:49 GMT
Hi Max,

I apologize for my not so kind words.

I'm on the way to refactor the TTFFile part and hopefully add CFF
support. I will follow your suggestions and issue my patch.

Best Regards
Alex

-  
e-mail: alexanderkiel@gmx.net
web:    www.alexanderkiel.net


On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 17:28 +0200, Max Berger wrote:
> Alex,
> 
> please note that the FOP code has been developed by multiple volunteers
> over the last ten years. As such, it does not always follow one clear
> path of design.
> 
> That said, refactoring the FOP code for easier reading / maintainability
> is definitely wanted! The proper steps would be:
> 
> - ensure that there are junit tests for the existing functionality. If
> not, add them.
> 
> - ensure all junit tests run on your machine
> 
> - refactor away, keeping in mind fop's conventions:
> http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/dev/conventions.html
> Please note that FOP is currently still on Java 1.4.
> 
> - ensure all junit tests still pass
> 
> - create a bug report with [patch] in the subject line and attach your
> patch.
> 
> Max
> 
> Alexander Kiel schrieb:
> > Hi Jeremias,
> > 
> > ok I think the first step would be to add CFF support into
> > org.apache.fop.fonts.truetype.TTFFile or to split TTFFile into
> > TrueTypeFile and OpenTypeFile and add CFF support only to OpenTypeFile.
> > 
> > In the last hour I waded through TTFReader, TTFFile, TTFDirTabEntry and
> > the OpenType Spec [1]. What about refactoring this code mess as a whole?
> > I mean seriously, does all of the FOP code looks like this one?
> > 
> > 
> > Best Regards
> > Alex 
> > 
> > 
> > [1]: <http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otspec/otff.htm>
> > 
> > -  
> > e-mail: alexanderkiel@gmx.net
> > web:    www.alexanderkiel.net
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, 2009-09-15 at 09:48 +0200, Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> >> Hi Alex,
> >>
> >> second good news today. I guess we need to define what should be covered
> >> by "Open Type". One important aspect is certainly CFF support (which
> >> I've just mentioned to Jonathan a few minutes ago). Another aspect is
> >> what Bertrand Delacrétaz started to look into: ligatures, character
> >> combination and such. CFF should be relatively easy to implement.
> >> Ligature support is going to be much harder as this will have effects
> >> into the layout engine.
> >>
> >> OpenType fonts that have TrueType glyphs and don't require the advanced
> >> typographical stuff are already supported today, but many OTF fonts have
> >> CFF glyph data. So that would be the first priority IMO.
> >>
> >> On 15.09.2009 09:23:39 Alexander Kiel wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I'm new to the fop-dev list but use FOP for some years already.
> >>>
> >>> Recently I tried to use OpenType fonts. As documented FOP doesn't
> >>> support OpenType fonts yet.
> >>>
> >>> The last and only discussion I could found on fop-dev is from 2006 [1].
> >>> Looking into the trunk, there is not really anything done with respect
> >>> to OpenType. So what is the state of OpenType support in 2009?
> >>>
> >>> Sure I could possibly help implementing it.
> >>>
> >>> Best Regards
> >>> Alex
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> [1]:
> >>> <http://www.mail-archive.com/fop-dev@xmlgraphics.apache.org/msg04892.html>
> >>>
> >>> -  
> >>> e-mail: alexanderkiel@gmx.net
> >>> web:    www.alexanderkiel.net
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Jeremias Maerki
> >>
> >>
> 
> 

Mime
View raw message