From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/24671 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Taco Hoekwater Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: Re: URw metric files Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:55:53 +0100 Message-ID: <43AB2EF9.5080708@elvenkind.com> References: <43A98126.5060001@touchtelindia.net> <43A99755.50408@elvenkind.com> <7BB3910E-496E-4D6A-BB3F-700F9E21387C@cox.net> <43A9BBEB.6090501@elvenkind.com> <43AA8C27.2050507@wxs.nl> <43AA98FC.2060505@elvenkind.com> <43AB24CD.6020909@wxs.nl> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1135292294 4238 80.91.229.2 (22 Dec 2005 22:58:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:58:14 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Thu Dec 22 23:58:09 2005 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.88] helo=ronja.ntg.nl) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EpZNv-0007Hy-4K for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:58:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB7CB128AB; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:58:06 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 22940-01; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:58:06 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6871F128C2; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:55:50 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2CEBF128C2 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:55:49 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 22819-10 for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:55:48 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from post-25.mail.nl.demon.net (post-25.mail.nl.demon.net [194.159.73.195]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 362C7128AB for ; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 23:55:28 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from boo.demon.nl ([82.161.175.147]:55183 helo=[192.168.1.3]) by post-25.mail.nl.demon.net with esmtp (Exim 4.51) id 1EpZLL-0003ma-Jp; Thu, 22 Dec 2005 22:55:28 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050215) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Original-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users In-Reply-To: <43AB24CD.6020909@wxs.nl> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:24671 Archived-At: Hi, Hans Hagen wrote: >> My last one, yes. The one that only has lm->cm synonyms, nothing else. > > how about vietnamese ... we need to move the berry names to akb then: I see now that there are no vietnamese fonts in cont-fnt.zip, I thought you had included the t5 metrics as well. Those fonts should not be deleted from type-dis then, sorry. > [berry] vs. [adobekb] > does this makes sense? My original take was: if you know how to install the next context release, then you also know how to install cont-fnt, and no other trickery would be needed to get these postscript fonts to work. Just install cont-fnt if you want texfont names, or use e.g. \usetypescript[adobekb][ec] \usetypescript[palatino][ec] if you want to stick to berry names. Anything else will give you a "missing font" error, but one that should be easier to solve than the current "utmr8y" errors. So my plan was: no additional changes, just some removed \fontsynonyms: the ones that map to (regularly) unavailable fonts. > (The u* and p* files do differ, don't they? If so, what are the > compatibility issues involved? I remember some differences in spacing.) I do not think there will be compatibility issues since the old type-dis used the same actual metrics as the texfont-installed ones (both the u* (fontinst) and the [encoding]-u* (texfont) ones are based on the same .afm files, by URW). The only different ones are the p* ones that are (already and still will be) loaded by \usetypescript[adobekb]. These may or may not be based on actual Adobe metrics, I am not sure. Cheers, Taco