On 4/18/06, Werner LEMBERG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Using a CIDFont without a CMap is just gross. > > Yep. Is this still the case? I thought Han-Wen has changed this already.
Yes, it is. > > I think if we set the fonts up a bit better, we should be able to > > use xyshow rather than glyphshow, which is infinitely prettier. > > Are you sure about that? It means that you have to manage encoding > vectors because you can't access more that 255 glyphs at the same > time. That's incorrect. Level 2, at least, provides for multibyte encodings (the encoding is determined by the font). I'm pretty sure it's sophisticated enough to make a UTF-8 CMap, and I think GhostScript might come with one, though I'm not sure. David Feuer _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
