Faking the ligatures

Primoz Peterlin peterlin@biofiz.mf.uni-lj.si
Wed, 6 Sep 2000 19:29:04 -0400


Thank you for your reply!

On Tue, 5 Sep 2000, Pierre MacKay wrote:

> Xdvi is calling out a font which has been pre-rasterized by
> MakeTeXPK, and which presumably respects the full encoding
> of the Type1 font.  The VPL file fragment you show deliberately
> bypasses the ligature and substitutes f and i.  If you can
> find out where the ligatured glyph is, you can replace the
> two lines
>       (SETCHAR D 102) (COMMENT f)
>       (SETCHAR D 105) (COMMENT i)
> with the single line
>       (SETCHAR D 256) (COMMENT fi ligature)
> and use 257 for the fl in the same way.
> 
> That is, assuming that the glyphs are in ASE locations.
> If not, substitute the correct decimal value
> for the actual location.

I may have misunderstood this, but I believe this wouldn't have helped me
if my Type 1 font doesn't contain the `fi' ligature glyph in the first
place? Or perhaps I did have misunderstood? :)

It is not my problem that fontinst would refuse to use ligatures already
present in the PostScript font file. There are none, and I am quite happy
with them being substituted with a sequence of two letters.

I would like to learn, though, how running gsftopk differs from running
dvips. The latter does seem to be bypassing some steps compared to
gsftopk, doesn't it?

With kind regards,
Primoz

--
Primož Peterlin,   In┼ítitut za biofiziko, Med. fakulteta, Univerza v Ljubljani
Lipičeva 2, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenija.  primoz.peterlin@biofiz.mf.uni-lj.si
Tel: +386-1-5437632, fax: +386-1-4315127, http://sizif.mf.uni-lj.si/~peterlin/