[Groff] Re: afmtodit problems

[Michail Vidiassov]

Dear Werner,

I have changed afmtodit again, to support
unicode PS glyph names.
Due to the large volume of changes, I do not attach the diff,
but my version is at
http://www.iaas.msu.ru/tmp/afmtodit.
See comments in the file for details on changes.

afmtodit with this patch works for the  CourierStd.afm you have sent me,
but a problem surfaced, the possible mapping
of many ps glyphs to one groff glyph.
Watch the warnings while processing the CourierStd.afm file.
What to do in such case?

One more problem is your choice of not assigning groff glyph names
to ps glyphs whose names can not be mapped to unicode strings.
Due to this choice we loose kerning information for this glyphs
(since they all map to ---).
Addressing ps glyph by its number in the encoding is also less
portable, then calling it by name.
But this (extremly low pripority) problem may by addressed
not by encoding all glyphs, but adding some
escape sequence like \N, for printing the glyph by its ps name, not
a number in the encoding. (PS level 2 glyphshow may be abused for it).

                       Sincerely, Michail

On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Werner LEMBERG wrote:

>
> > > BTW, your former patch handles glyph names of the form `uniXXXX'.
> > > Do you time to implement full support of the AGL?  For example,
> > > glyph names like `uXXXX', `uniXXXXYYYYZZZZ....', `uXXXXXX',
> > > `uXXXX_uYYYY', ...
> >
> > Do you have a live example of an AFM file where such names are used?
> > May be some afm made from a unicode true type font?
>
> I've attached as an example the AFM file of the font CourierStd.otf
> (font revision 1.01998901367, created 2002-03-03) from Adobe as
> produced with pfaedit.
>