xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bertrand Delacretaz" <bdelacre...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Re: Implementing OpenType font support, how hard?
Date Thu, 03 Aug 2006 15:40:36 GMT
Hi, and thanks everybody for your replies.

On 8/2/06, Jeremias Maerki <dev@jeremias-maerki.ch> wrote:

> ...No, I've been able to restore kerning support. If there's still some
> commented code I should probably remove it now. Can you give me a
> pointer?...

You're right, kerning works for builtin fonts at least. It doesn't
seem to work in my tests with user-specified fonts, but I've just done
a quick test.

> ...I wonder if supporting Type 1 outlines would be worth the effort. So far,
> I've never seen an OpenType font with Type 1 outlines. Have you?...

Seems like most of the standard OpenType fonts on my MacOSX system use
Type 1 outlines.

But you're right that supporting TrueType outlines would be a good
start already.

> > 2c) Verify that the character encodings are correct...

> ...The problem is that FOP does not currently support generating a
> ToUnicode table. Victor Mote has the fixed in FOray and we have a patch
> in Bugzilla that uses that code to do the same for FOP. Since nobody has
> dealt with the legal part of grabbing someone else's code in this case,
> the patch hasn't been applied, yet.
> The patch:
> http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=5335

IIUC what's needed here is to contact Adam Strzelecki, author of the
patch, and ask him to "Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works
(as per the Apache Software License ยง5)"? This is how things are done
when patches are uploaded via http://issues.apache.org/jira.

> ...Finishing 2) would then also mean finishing
> FOrayFont to the degree that it can be used in FOP. I guess that will
> need further deliberation...

I've studied FOray and integrating it is probably out of scope for my
current work. It doesn't look too hard, but it impacts quite a lot of
existing code, so I fear there might be hidden roadbumps in there.

OTOH I agree that using it (and maybe re-integrating that code in
FOP?) seems to make more sense than doing a lot of work on FOP's
current font-handling code.

Also, from other's comments in this thread, it seems like handling
smart font features (glyph substitutions) might be a lot of work,
better done in a (yet hypothetical) second phase once basic OpenType
support works well.

At this point, my plan, for a first phase, would be

-Integrate Adam Strzelecki's patch to support extended character sets cleanly

-Check that OpenType fonts with TrueType outlines are usable as custom
fonts, including kerning. Fix things as needed, and have a look at
what's needed to support Type 1/CFF outlines.

-Try to get a few OpenType reference fonts that can be distributed
with FOP for testing and demonstration (I'd ask some font editors, the
fonts can be crippled if they want, for example by removing portions
of the glyph sets).

The smart fonts stuff would (maybe) come later, the above might be
sufficient for my current project. I'm being much less ambitious than
yesterday...but the above looks like a useful concrete step.



View raw message