Summary: | prefer BaseFont over FontName (more often) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | MuPDF | Reporter: | zeniko |
Component: | mupdf | Assignee: | MuPDF bugs <mupdf-bugs> |
Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | tor.andersson |
Priority: | P4 | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | PC | ||
OS: | Windows 7 | ||
URL: | http://code.google.com/p/sumatrapdf/issues/detail?id=1666 | ||
Customer: | Word Size: | --- |
Description
zeniko
2011-10-17 05:58:35 UTC
The linked file is 404'd. Are there any cases where using the FontName rather than the BaseName is actually preferred? I've tried ignoring the FontName altogether and get one progression on the test files and no regressions. Maybe that will end up being an easier approach? (In reply to comment #1) > Are there any cases where using the FontName rather than the > BaseName is actually preferred? http://bugs.ghostscript.com/show_bug.cgi?id=691570#c4 (also note that in that case, cutting the name part before the '+' does the wrong thing - which is why we only check the 7th character and not the entire name for a '+') |