xmlgraphics-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremias Maerki <...@jeremias-maerki.ch>
Subject Re: svn commit: r722108 - /xmlgraphics/commons/trunk/src/java/org/apache/xmlgraphics/fonts/Glyphs.java
Date Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:46:32 GMT
On 02.12.2008 14:50:12 Chris Bowditch wrote:
> Jeremias Maerki wrote:
> 
> > On 02.12.2008 13:51:06 Chris Bowditch wrote:
> > 
> 
> <snip/>
> 
> >>I think making the whole SVG Text process more transparent would 
> >>really help as it seems quite mystical. I know you made some further 
> >>notes on this process yesterday, but some more details about Font 
> >>substitution and glyph relations would be useful.
> > 
> > 
> > That stuff is not mystical, just complicated because by now we have so
> > much functionality and support so many different output formats which
> > all have slightly different facilities. Furthermore, when I refactored
> > the SVG/PDF text painting I didn't have enough time to improve Batik's
> > font support so we it would be possible to plug FOP's font support into
> > Batik. Add to that the fact that, for example, PostScript and AFP still
> > have inferior text handling for SVG graphics which causes a higher
> > percentage of SVG text to be painted as shapes.
> > 
> > I'm not sure how to make the documentation much clearer. Font
> > substitution itself is well documented. I'm hesitant to go in the
> > details of glyph relations because the best approach would be to
> > document all the substitutions we make and if that data is not generated
> > from the same source as the functionality in the code we always risk
> > losing synchronization. And that's a lot of work for little gain.
> 
> You mentioned that Dialog gets translated to Times, why that happens is 
> not clear to me. If there are a set of hard coded Font substitutions 
> then they should be documented. If it's something the AWT classes do 
> then a sentence that says Fonts may be substituted as per rules 
> documented in X would be helpful.

There's not much hard-coding, except for the few font family names for
the base 14 fonts which can be overwritten. In your particular case,
you've had an explicit font substitution in your configuration file:

<substitution>
  <from font-family="Dialog"/>
  <to font-family="Times"/>
</substitution>

That's the sole reason why Dialog was substituted by Times. "Times" in
that case was then mapped to the base 14 Times font.

I've listed the hard-coded font mappings in FOP's documentation.

> You misunderstood me when I said to document glyph substitutions. I was 
> thinking more along the lines of a sentence that said "glyphs are 
> subject to substitution as per the Unicode standard Annex 14 <link/>" or 
> similar.

Ah, but that would be a wrong thing to say as a general expression
because we've only registered a dozen or so hard-coded glyph
substitution groups in XGC. I made a note in FOP's documentation.

HTH
Jeremias Maerki


---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org


Mime
View raw message