rendering Postscript fonts
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 10:05:59 -0400, I wrote:
> Groff makes the PS, and then I use gs to make a PDF. What I believe is that
> people reading this document (likely on Windows) will call up their local
> font definitions when they view this. These definitions are used to draw the
> characters, but the spacing is all defined by the PDF. Is that correct?
On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 23:07:16 +0200, Florian Kulzer replied:
> That depends on whether the fonts are embedded in the PDF. ...
The results of the tests you suggested were interesting. Looking first at
the PS made with groff, I found no fonts shown as
"%%DocumentSuppliedResources:", except for one that was in the figures. This
must have been embedded by Illustrator, which I used to create the figures.
There were no instances of "%%DocumentFonts:", and only the font in the
figures showed as "%%BeginResource: font". The main text fonts (the four
Palatino fonts) were shown as "%%IncludeResource:".
Then I made the PDFs with gs. Adding "-dEmbedAllFonts=true" didn't affect
the results, as I gather it is the default. In Acrobat, the four Palatino
fonts showed as "Embedded Subset". The Symbol font, which I did use, was
not shown as embedded for some reason. pdffonts gave the same results.
For fun, I then changed the "internalname" line in
/usr/share/groff/1.18.1/font/devps/PR from "PalatinoLinotype-Roman" to
"Zalatino" and remade the PS and PDF. The text was no longer justified in
either the PS (viewed with gv) or the PDF (viewed with Acrobat whether XP or
Debian). I suspect that the intercharacter spacing is correct but a
different font was substituted. I had guessed that if the font were
embedded, it wouldn't matter what name was assigned. But apparently I
guessed wrong.
Since Grants.gov accepts PalatinoLinotype, and since it's on all XP setups,
I should be fine. The documents viewed with Acrobat look OK. But I
wouldn't say I understand all of this just yet.
Thanks.
Reply to: