Re: Large unicode PFB files

[Lars Hellström <Lars.Hellstrom@math.umu.se>]

At 21.29 +0200 2000-08-24, BP Jonsson wrote:
>Large unicode PFB files.

Just out of curiosity, how are "unicode PFB"s different from ordinary PFBs?
Do they have 16-bit encodings, or is it just that they contain very many
glyphs?

>That's what I have, and I figure I can copy out
>subsets of their AFM files, turn them into ENC files and then do the
>appropriate things with _fontinst to use them with TeX.

Well, you don't turn the AFM into an ENC (you turn it into an MTX, which is
then turned into a PL or VPL), and the only case I can think of in which
you would need to cut out subsets of the AFM is if the AFM as a whole is
too large for TeX to manage, but I think you're on the right way.

>The question is
>what I should call the PFB files that I provide _fontinst with in terms of
>the TeX fontname system?  Should I just call them
><provider><face><style>.pfb and leave the encoding unspecified?

That depends. If you command fontinst on the \installfont level then
fontinst has no preferences as to what the fonts are called (as you
explicitly specify all file names), but if you use the \latinfamily command
then you'll have to get the names right if fontinst is to find the files.
There are a couple of macros named \<something>_encoding which control what
it assumes to be the encoding names to use in various circumstances and
redefining these would probably do the trick, but I don't remember exactly
which they are at the moment.

BTW, there is something called a "SuperFont" encoding in the fontname
scheme. Could that be what you have?

Lars Hellström