Re: postscript fonts vs. pango aliases

["Adrian E. Feiguin" <afeiguin uci edu>]

I understand what you are saying, I've been digging into gnome-print and 
I get it. The reason why I'm hesitant of doing it this way is: my code 
is more primitve and basic, but simpler; and the main point, I 
understand that pango cannot render symbol fonts (yes, it's a font 
problem and not a pango problem), and symbols are crucial to a 
scientiffic application like mine.

So my idea was, if tha urw-fonts package in the gimp repository includes 
the 35 basic Adobe fonts, I should't have problems using them. But for 
some reason, after installing them, I can display them using xfontsel, 
but not with gnome-print or pango. Why is that?

I am planning to take a look at ggv now, but I'm not sure this is a good 
idea.
Thank you for any advice,
<ADRIAN>

Owen Taylor wrote:

> On Thu, 2004-08-19 at 18:12, Adrian E. Feiguin wrote:
>  
>
> > I am developing an application that is wysiwyg and generates postscript 
> > output. I have wrappers that basically assign a pango alias to each of 
> > the 35 default Adobe fonts, eg:
> > {
> >   "Times-Roman", // ps name
> >  "times, Medium" //pango name"
> > }
> >
> > I want the output in the screen to look the closest possible to the ps 
> > output. The problem is that the user can change the fonts aliases at 
> > will, either with pangox.aliases or fonts.conf/local.conf, and make say 
> > "Helvetica" look like "Courier". I don't want this to happen, I want 
> > Times to look like Times, and Helvetica to look like Helvetica (unless 
> > the font is not present, in case I use "sans"). Any idea how to overcome 
> > this?
> >
> >    
>
> Probably not the answer you are looking for, but when trying to get
> WYSIWYG, it's *much* easier to make the fonts on the printer look
> like the fonts on the screen than vice-versa.
>
> The approach that Windows takes, the approach that GNOME takes with
> gnome-print is to simply to embed all fonts in the PS output.
> (sub-setted as appropriate.)
>
> Failing that, what I'd suggest is mapping the PS font names to their
> URW equivalents ... Times-Roman to Nimbus Roman No9 L, etc. they are
> very close copies, present on almost all Linux and similar systems,
> and their is little sane reason for a user to remap them to something
> else ... if a user does that, they get what they deserve.
>
> Regards,
> 					Owen
>
>