Re: Future of the `Karl Berry Font Naming Scheme'...

["K. Berry" <kb@cs.umb.edu>]

    While the Karl Berry (KB) scheme can fit many font names into 8 characters,
    it doesn't fit them all.

True, and the only 8.3 solution is arbitrary names, as in abc123__ ...

    It might matter to use consistent names for the `standard 35' fonts that
    are in most PostScript printers, but beyond that, I don't see that it
    matters greatly.

It helps for the usual PostScript fonts for which Sebastian provides
support on CTAN, too.

As for the future in general, as I've said all along, I'd love to avoid
8.3 -- it was all a gigantic kludge anyway for the longname-impaired.
These days, Win95 & NT are getting ever more prevalent, so it might be
reasonable to try using long names for some fonts you distribute, and
see how many complaints you get -- you might be surprised.  Maybe 2000
would be a good time to change :-).

As for what actual long names should be, the simplest would be to use
the PostScript FontName, which is already unique in practice.  Your idea
of the .fd name sounds reasonable, too.  When that's not possible (i.e.,
your multiple master stuff), I'm not sure what would be best.  I wrote
down some ideas in the fontname document ...

--KAB05956.883495241/hub.cs.umb.edu--