Print

Print


Javier,

 > Actually, this is not a criticism to this approach, just an issue. While
 > there are free PostScript ot1cmr fonts, there are only MF t1cmr ones, which
 > to me is a huge difference. Sometimes I combine Palatino (T1) and cmtt
 > (OT1),
 > and \selectfont{T1,OT1} is not enough. The solution I took in my macros was
 > to allow explicit declarations like:
 >   \SetFontEnconding{cmtt}{OT1}

found that by now in the code (it wasn't in the general documentation)

well, can we analyse that a bit? what exactly is the problem here?
or, say, why do you want to do that?

it seems to me that this all boils down to "i want to ensure that all is
Type1" so that i get proper pdf files. or am i wrong?

perhaps i'm wrong and there are other reasons , but the above seems to me the
kind of natural reason.

so perhaps it is not the encoding you really want to force but to prevent
selection of certain fonts. in that case, wouldn't it be better if we could
come up with a different method of specifying this?

assume for a moment that you have a font family with a large number of glyphs
(say CM fonts :-) then a setting like yours

   \SetFontEnconding{cmtt}{OT1}

would not work very well in a document with spanish and russian text. why?

because there are russian CM fonts at least they are identified as cmr and
cmtt and so on. (and i think this is not really wrong even though perhaps not
absolutely right either. but they have been made to look and fit the latin CM
fonts).

so fixing the encoding to OT1 would through typerwriter in the russian part of
the document off track since that one would need LCY encoding.


i don't know what is the right approach but if it is really something related
to type1 viz MF fonts then perhaps the whole thing should and can be done
differently

what do you think?

frank