[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: J"org objections
- To: lcs@topo.matups.fr
- Subject: Re: J"org objections
- From: alanje@cogs.susx.ac.uk (Alan Jeffrey)
- Date: Tue, 19 Apr 94 10:03 BST
- Cc: math-font-discuss@cogs.susx.ac.uk
Just a short note on the topic of `atomism'. Type 1 fonts have always
had the possibility of containing many more glyphs than their base
encoding vector. So any proposal to produce a similar MF technology
should use as much of the Type 1 technology as appropriate, in
particular *please* use registered glyph names whenever possible.
Unfortunately, until TeX, device drivers, and the dvi format can agree
on a method of using glyph names rather than slot numbers, we're stuck
with a combination of raw font re-encoding and composite fonts or VFs
for accessing Type 1 fonts. Oh if only the dvi format supported glyph
names... sigh...
Alan.