[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: AFM font handling corrected?
From: |
Mats Bengtsson |
Subject: |
Re: AFM font handling corrected? |
Date: |
Wed, 30 Jul 2003 10:39:33 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4b) Gecko/20030507 |
OK, I checked the Adobe Font Metrics File Format Specification
document (available at http://www.wotsit.org, for example) and
found the following statement:
====================================================================
3.2 Units of Measurement
All measurements in AFM, AMFM, and ACF M fi les are given in terms
of units equal to 1/1000 of the scale factor (point size) of the font
being used. To compute actual sizes in a document (in points; with
72 points = 1 inch), these amounts should be multiplied by
( scale factor of font ) / 1000.
==========================================================================
As far as I can understand, this means that the values should be
multiplied by 10/1000 for cmr10, right? Note that the definition
of point here is different from what TeX uses 1 inch = 72.27pt,
but that should only make a minor difference.
cmr10.afm and other AFM files can be found at CTAN in /fonts/cm/afm/.
I tried to quickly browse through the source code of afm2tfm that's
included in teTeX, but couldn't find the relevant parts.
/Mats
Rune Zedeler wrote:
Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
IIRC the 1000 in an AFM is relative to either the design size or the
baselineskip of the font. Isn't an em 10pt in cmr10?
I tried to (dirtily) hack afm.cc to multiply the sizes by 10 if the font
is CMR10.
It does not give exactly the same results with and without the afm-file.
Unfortunately I made a test file which produces bad results no matter if
the cmr afm-files are there or not. The result is worse with the
afm-files, but it is also wrong without them :-(
\score {
\notes <
\context Staff \notes { c d e f g a b c' c d e f }
\context Lyrics \lyrics { this is a loooooooooooooooooooooooooong
test aaaa }
>
}
the long word overlaps the next word.
Without the afm-files (i.e. on a tetex-system) it is approx "ng" that
overlaps, where as with the afm-files, "oong" overlaps.
Can anybody else reproduce this bug?
The bug is also there in 1.6, so 1.8 is not in danger :-)
The font-metrics code really needs an intense look.
-Rune
--
=============================================
Mats Bengtsson
Signal Processing
Signals, Sensors and Systems
Royal Institute of Technology
SE-100 44 STOCKHOLM
Sweden
Phone: (+46) 8 790 8463
Fax: (+46) 8 790 7260
Email: address@hidden
WWW: http://www.s3.kth.se/~mabe
=============================================