Symptoms: PostScript fonts incompatible with Adobe Type Manager When viewing some PostScript font files that are shipped with Ghostscript package, they are not recognized by Adobe Type Manager. Adobe Type Manager shows error message 'An error occured while trying to show sample sheet' when trying to view those files. Affected files include: c059013l.pfb (Century Schoolbook L Roman, version 1.06) c059016l.pfb (Century Schoolbook L Bold, version 1.06) c059033l.pfb (Century Schoolbook L Italic, version 1.06) c059036l.pfb (Century Schoolbook L Bold Italic, version 1.06) d050000l.pfb (Dingbats, version 001.005) n019043l.pfb (Nimbus Sans L Regular Condensed, version 1.06) n019044l.pfb (Nimbus Sans L Bold Condensed, version 1.06) n019063l.pfb (Nimbus Sans L Regular Condensed Italic, version 1.06) n022003l.pfb (Nimbus Mono L Regular, version 1.06) n022004l.pfb (Nimbus Mono L Bold, version 1.06) n022023l.pfb (Nimbus Mono L Regular Oblique, version 1.06) n022024l.pfb (Nimbus Mono L Bold Oblique, version 1.06) p052003l.pfb (URW Palladio L Roman, version 1.06) p052004l.pfb (URW Palladio L Bold, version 1.06) p052023l.pfb (URW Palladio L Italic, version 1.06) p052024l.pfb (URW Palladio L Bold Italic, version 1.06) s050000l.pfb (Standard Symbols L, version 001.005) The inability for ATM to recognize these files can prevent these fonts from being downloaded to printer, causing inconsistent document appearence. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ghostscript version (or include output from "gs -h"): 8.57 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Where you got Ghostscript: Ghostscript.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Hardware system you are using (including printer model if the problem involves printing): Memory: 384MB CPU: Intel Pentium II 400 Sound: ESS Solo-1 Video: Neomagic MagicMedia 256AV ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Operating system you are using: Windows 98SE ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If you are using X Windows, and your problem involved output to the screen, the output from running xdpyinfo and xwininfo: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ C compiler you are using, including its version, if you compiled Ghostscript yourself: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ If you compiled Ghostscript yourself, changes you made to the makefiles: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Environment variables: GS_DEVICE GS_FONTPATH GS_LIB GS_OPTIONS ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Command line: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ URL or FTP location of test files (include the data at the end of this form if 500K or less): ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Suggested fix, if any: All, and only, the affected files mentioned above do not have their corresponding .pfm (binary PostScript Font Metrics) files, so it appears that the incompatibility is caused by the lack of such files. An obvious solution is to just add those files. However, Windows Vista does not support Type 1 font when used with GDI+ library, so the resulting font is only useful for limited environment. Furthermore, tools that can edit PostScript outline are rare and more expensive in comparison, so finding font contributor may be an issue. A longer term solution is to just ship OpenType fonts for all environments, which can include both outlines and font metrics into one file, eliminating the chance of missing files when creating Ghostscript font packages for target platforms. Furthermore, the PostScript font outline used in OpenType is in CFF, so it is fully compatible with Vista. OpenType font is well supported under Unix and compatibles (via FreeType), Microsoft Windows (9x with ATM), Mac OS, so they can be used outside Ghostscript. However, if Ghostscript ever ships OpenType fonts, it is more preferable for the fonts to use TrueType outline, because it is easier to find tools that can edit them, and Ghostscript already support type 42.
The latest free URW fonts distributed with GNOME do come with .pfm, which allows the fonts to be recognized by ATM. However, for some reason there no hinting on these fonts, which need to be fixed before bundling them into Ghostscript. Even so, it is still preferable to switch to OpenType format to reduce the chance of human error.
So, we ship .pfm files for some but not all of the pfb fonts. I gather this is the issue? If so, the resolution of this bug is to ships .pfb files for all of them in the next release. We don't see any advantage to converting the files to CFF OpenType in the near future. Perhaps if our font parser gets rewritten in C and is demonstrably faster.
Repeating Ralph's question, would adding PFM files be sufficient? At least with an old 16-bit version of ATM, the PFM file was not needed. You only needed the PFB and AFM files, and ATM would generate the necessary PFM information. With Windows Vista, you seem to need a PFM file to install a Type 1 font.
Created attachment 3570 [details] Fixed and added PFMs (ghostscript-fonts-std-8.11-PFMs.zip) I'm not the OP, but looked into this and related problems time ago. > Repeating Ralph's question, would adding PFM files be sufficient? Yes and no. Yes, because having PFB + PFM pairs is sufficient. No, because the PFMs currently shipped are not accepted by the Type 1 manager built into Windows (tested with WinXP-SP2), although they are accepted by Adobe Type Manager Lite on Win98SE. There are already some reports here about this. There are two separate causes, both dealing with the kerning table. One was fixed a long time ago in PFAEdit, but PFMs with that defect are still floating around (some in the GS distribution). I have no idea what's the status with the 2nd issue. I attach a ZIP with the PFMs that worked for me, corresponding to the fonts in "ghostscript-fonts-std-8.11.tar.gz". The files with uppercase letters in names are new (note: change them to lowercase, this case thing was just the way I used to distinguish them). The others are modified versions of existing files. > At least with an old 16-bit version of ATM, the PFM file was not > needed. You only needed the PFB and AFM files, and ATM would > generate the necessary PFM information. With Windows Vista, you > seem to need a PFM file to install a Type 1 font. Maybe there was a third file inthere, a *.INF? The combination PFB + AFM + INF works with ATM and Windows too, but there are some annoyances: - Cannot preview the font by double-clicking; - Cannot install it by drag'n'drop; must use "Control Panel"/ "Fonts"/ "File"/ "Install new font..."/ etc, and the font installer will generate the PFM and add the font; - Adobe does not document this format (and it's not related in any way to the *.INF files used by Windows setup); there is some information about it on the Net, but unofficial.
The Adobe Type Basics fonts I have from 1992 do indeed have the PFB/AFM/INF set of files. These will install on Windows XP, but will not install on Windows Vista. Windows Vista required PFB/PFM files. I used a shareware application to convert AFM to PFM, and then successfully installed the fonts on Windows Vista.
> We don't see any advantage to converting the files to CFF OpenType in the near > future. Perhaps if our font parser gets rewritten in C and is demonstrably > faster. In addition of Vista WPF only supports PostScript as OpenType CFF, PostScript Type 1 font only supports 256 glyphs, which require implementing hacks to type 1 format to support characters added by extensions such as the Cyrillized free URW fonts and Free UCS Outline Fonts projects. Furthermore, today's PostScript printers include core fonts using bigger character sets and incorporate text layout features, which cannot be fully utilized or previewed properly unless Ghostscript fonts are updated, and the fonts are not going to be updated properly or at all unless the font is converted to a modern format that can accommodate larger character sets and typographic features.
The latest (8.62) binary release package still does not include the needed PFMs. Although it isn't exactly the OpenType update needed, but it is better than nothing.
The TeX Gyre project[1] currently hosts OpenType versions of the URW fonts, but in different names: Adventor: ITC Avant Garde Gothic Bonum: URW Bookman L Chorus: URW Chancery L Medium Italic Cursor: Nimbus Mono L/Courier Heros: Nimbus Sans L/Helvetica Pagella: URW Palladio L/Palatino Schola: URW Century Schoolbook L Termes: Nimbus Roman No9 L These fonts have extended the glyph set to 1250 glyphs, which should satisfy the future need for Ghostscript and other font application for quite some time. [1] http://www.gust.org.pl/projects/e-foundry/tex-gyre
Created attachment 4454 [details] tg-v1.104otf.zip As I mentioned before, here are the TeX Gyre fonts. It includes all the extended variants except Symbol and ITC Zapf Dingbats clones, in OpenType format.
There are few notes about the TeX Gyre fonts: - The fonts are distributed under GUST Font License (GFL), which is legal equivalent to LaTeX Project Public License (LPPL), version 1.3c or later. Although they are considered as free software licences by FSF, but it is not compatible with the GPL because in section CONDITIONS ON DISTRIBUTION AND MODIFICATION, clause 6d says you must distribute unmodified copy of the work, or information of obtaining it. Considering that the current GPL Ghostscript fonts haven't been updated for nearly 5 years, and the Cyrillized free URW fonts haven't been incorporated to the core font set since then, I believe it is time to end the stagnation and start negotiating with TeX Gyre developers over the licensing issues NOW, while it is still easy to track down TG contributers. As a result, the priority is raised to P3. - The TG fonts use matrix heights taller than the current Ghostscript fonts, which can lead to text formatting issues. The heights are even taller than the Microsoft's counterparts (eg: Heros > Arial > Nimbus Sans L, Pagella > Palatino Linotype > Palatino), and in the Cursor, it is narrower than Courier New. This is an issue to be addressed before using TG fonts as a replacement, but it cannot be done until licensing issue is taken care of. - The TG fonts blanketly naming all the font weights to regular and bold, which can be problematic for font matching. For example, URW Bookman L Demi is now called Bonum Bold, even though in ITC Bookman (which the designs of both fonts originate), the bold font is heavier than Bonum Bold. - The TG extensions may not be metric compatible with the original intents of foundries and designers, or using the same PUA code point assignments in the original fonts. This can cause formatting errors for users that use fonts embedded into printers, or printing documents using fonts from original foundries/designers, especially when OpenType features are used. That affects Adventor, which has an updated form called ITC Avant Garde Gothic Pro that includes extra ligatures; Bonum, which affects supports of swashes in ITC Bookman; Chorus, which affects ITC Zapf Chancery Pro (Monotype); Heros, which affect Neue Helvetica, Helvetica World; Pagella, which affect Palatino Linotype, Palatino nova; Termes, which affect Times New Roman (Monotype, Windows), Times (Linotype, Mac OS), CG Times, Symbol. - When/if the TG fonts get adopted by Ghostscript, the Standard Symbols L and Dingbats fonts still need to be overhauled. The Symbol fonts can be made into some symbolic link to Termes Regular Greek characters (which is how Monotype built separate Symbol font using Times New Roman Greek). As for Dingbats, the Adobe version of ITC Zapf Dingbats already mapped the glyphs to their Unicode counterparts, so it is trivial to implement. However, the real goal is to turn the new Dingbats font into a generic Unicode font that include all the Unicode-assigned dingbats and symbols that do not have type-sensitive components (eg: letters enclosed by circles, squares, or recycle symbol).
After some investigation over TeX Gyre fonts, these fonts are modified from the GPL Ghostscript fonts, and were relicensed, under terms incompatible with original licence, without records to prove authorizations by previuous authors.[1] Unless licence issue is resolved, it can further undermine any future efforts of updating existing fonts. As a result of the discovery, the priority is raised to P2. Here are some contacts to the developers (Polish preferred): Janusz M. Nowacki, "Ulan": http://www.janusz.nowacki.strefa.pl/home-e.html Marcin Woliński: http://www.mimuw.edu.pl/~wolinski/TeX.html [1] http://www.mail-archive.com/fedora-fonts-list@redhat.com/msg00480.html
Since Artifex Software Inc. is the primary "support" organization on this bug tracker (bugs.ghostscript.com), I am closing this bug as not relevant (since it seems to have devolved into a Tex Gyre licensing problem).