Font Weight
I have a question about Font Weight. We're using Helvetica and using FOP to take the FO file and generate it as both (1) a PostScript file and (2) a TIFF file. Additionally, we are able to use third-party software to take the PostScript file and convert it directly to a second TIFF file (for comparison reasons). Of course, the fonts on the TIFF from FOP are a little pixilated and the "normal" font could stand to be rendered a bit darker. I am using Helvetica and tried to set the font-weight to 500 or 600, but it gets replaced with weight 400, which is apparently the "normal" Helvetica font registered in the system. Font-weight Bold and values of 800 and 900 use the "bold" Helvetica which is weight 700. Is there an easy way to use / access a darker 500 or 600 weight Helvetica, or possibly render the or am I really sunk here? I've already extended the Java2DRenderer, for my own purposes. The following Graphics2D rendering hints don't seem to do much when included: graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_FRACTIONALMETRICS, RenderingHints.VALUE_FRACTIONALMETRICS_ON); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_ANTIALIAS_ON); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_TEXT_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_TEXT_ANTIALIAS_ON); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_RENDERING, RenderingHints.VALUE_RENDER_QUALITY); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_STROKE_CONTROL, RenderingHints.VALUE_STROKE_PURE); Suggestions would be very helpful. Much thanks, Josh - The information in this message may be proprietary and/or confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify First Data immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer.
RE: Font Weight
Of course, I subscribe to the DIGEST version and totally missed today's thread of "font substitution question" which is similarly related. I have seen the following TODO note: 7.9.9 font-weight Basic partial partial partial TODO font weights I plan to contact fop-dev and see if there is any way I can help with this. -Josh - The information in this message may be proprietary and/or confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify First Data immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscr...@xmlgraphics.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-h...@xmlgraphics.apache.org
Re: Font Weight
FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content. Regards, Glenn On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Marquart, Joshua D < joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com> wrote: > I have a question about Font Weight. > > > > We’re using Helvetica and using FOP to take the FO file and generate it as > both (1) a PostScript file and (2) a TIFF file. > > > > Additionally, we are able to use third-party software to take the > PostScript file and convert it directly to a second TIFF file (for > comparison reasons). > > > > Of course, the fonts on the TIFF from FOP are a little pixilated and the > “normal” font could stand to be rendered a bit darker. > > > > I am using Helvetica and tried to set the font-weight to 500 or 600, but it > gets replaced with weight 400, which is apparently the “normal” Helvetica > font registered in the system. > > Font-weight Bold and values of 800 and 900 use the “bold” Helvetica which > is weight 700. > > > > Is there an easy way to use / access a darker 500 or 600 weight Helvetica, > or possibly render the or am I really sunk here? > > > > I’ve already extended the Java2DRenderer, for my own purposes. > > > > The following Graphics2D rendering hints don’t seem to do much when > included: > > > > graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_FRACTIONALMETRICS, > RenderingHints.VALUE_FRACTIONALMETRICS_ON); > > graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_ANTIALIASING, > RenderingHints.VALUE_ANTIALIAS_ON); > > graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_TEXT_ANTIALIASING, > RenderingHints.VALUE_TEXT_ANTIALIAS_ON); > > graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_RENDERING, > RenderingHints.VALUE_RENDER_QUALITY); > > graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_STROKE_CONTROL, > RenderingHints.VALUE_STROKE_PURE); > > > > Suggestions would be very helpful. > > > > Much thanks, > > > > Josh > > > > -- > > * The information in this message may be proprietary and/or confidential, > and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the > intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this > message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly > prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify > First Data immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your > computer. * >
RE: Font Weight
“FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content.” I understand Fop doesn’t synthesize the weights. I understand that it has two specific built-in weights (700 and 400) that are being used to replace other weights per the following: When I set-up using a Java2DRenderer and specify the following FO content snippets: 900 Weight … 800 Weight … 700 Weight … 600 Weight … 500 Weight … 400 Weight … 300 Weight … the logger gives me the following information: WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,900" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,800" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,600" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,500" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,400". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,300" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,400". So I would need to supply very specific replacement fonts for Helvetica,normal,900 ( and 800-300, not counting 400)? (Same as above when replacing Helvetica with Arial). I DO understand the following: 1- that per the current specs, item 7.9.9 for font-weight has a “TODO font weights” message. 2 - that per the current build, the font classes generated from Helvetica.xml and HelveticaBold.xml are used for 400 and 700 respectively 3 - that per the fuzzy replacement, 700 is used for 900-600 and 400 is used for 500-100(probably). So my questions still stand 1 - is there a simpler way to use / access / apply a darker 500 or 600 weight Helvetica and if so, what’s the best process to handle it given the codebase? 2 - should I instead render a “Helvetica500.xml” and generate the appropriate font class; obviously since that’s not yet been done with the existing fop codebase, it is probably a lot more work than needed. 3 - Any other option I should pursue? If there is a process started to handle item 7.9.9, I would be happy to pitch in and help, I am just not certain where to start. Thanks, Josh From: Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 6:40 PM To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Cc: Marquart, Joshua D Subject: Re: Font Weight FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content. Regards, Glenn On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: I have a question about Font Weight. We’re using Helvetica and using FOP to take the FO file and generate it as both (1) a PostScript file and (2) a TIFF file. Additionally, we are able to use third-party software to take the PostScript file and convert it directly to a second TIFF file (for comparison reasons). Of course, the fonts on the TIFF from FOP are a little pixilated and the “normal” font could stand to be rendered a bit darker. I am using Helvetica and tried to set the font-weight to 500 or 600, but it gets replaced with weight 400, which is apparently the “normal” Helvetica font registered in the system. Font-weight Bold and values of 800 and 900 use the “bold” Helvetica which is weight 700. Is there an easy way to use / access a darker 500 or 600 weight Helvetica, or possibly render the or am I really sunk here? I’ve already extended the Java2DRenderer, for my own purposes. The following Graphics2D rendering hints don’t seem to do much when included: graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_FRACTIONALMETRICS, RenderingHints.VALUE_FRACTIONALMETRICS_ON); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_ANTIALIAS_ON); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_TEXT_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_TEXT_ANTIALIAS_ON); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_RENDERING, RenderingHints.VALUE_RENDER_QUALITY); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_STROKE_CONTROL, RenderingHints.VALUE_STROKE_PURE); Suggestions would be very helpful. Much thanks, Josh in error, please notify First Data immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer. - The information in this message may be proprietary and/or confidential, and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify First Data immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from your computer.
RE: Font Weight
Yes. Generally one font file contains one font set with one weight. You would need to supply a custom font set to get a different weight. Any program which allows you to print in a different weight would do the same, to either require you to have a font set in that weight or to guess at it. Guessing can be bad. For instance I create images from FOP with the PNGRenderer. It gets larger images if I increase targetresolution. If I generate a smaller image then try to make it bigger with the Graphics2D transforming method you can see it gets fuzzy. Optional fuzzy logic could be useful, currently not implemented. From: Marquart, Joshua D [mailto:joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 11:50 AM To: Glenn Adams; fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: RE: Font Weight "FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content." I understand Fop doesn't synthesize the weights. I understand that it has two specific built-in weights (700 and 400) that are being used to replace other weights per the following: When I set-up using a Java2DRenderer and specify the following FO content snippets: 900 Weight ... 800 Weight ... 700 Weight ... 600 Weight ... 500 Weight ... 400 Weight ... 300 Weight ... the logger gives me the following information: WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,900" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,800" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,600" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,500" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,400". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,300" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,400". So I would need to supply very specific replacement fonts for Helvetica,normal,900 ( and 800-300, not counting 400)? (Same as above when replacing Helvetica with Arial). I DO understand the following: 1- that per the current specs, item 7.9.9 for font-weight has a "TODO font weights" message. 2 - that per the current build, the font classes generated from Helvetica.xml and HelveticaBold.xml are used for 400 and 700 respectively 3 - that per the fuzzy replacement, 700 is used for 900-600 and 400 is used for 500-100(probably). So my questions still stand 1 - is there a simpler way to use / access / apply a darker 500 or 600 weight Helvetica and if so, what's the best process to handle it given the codebase? 2 - should I instead render a "Helvetica500.xml" and generate the appropriate font class; obviously since that's not yet been done with the existing fop codebase, it is probably a lot more work than needed. 3 - Any other option I should pursue? If there is a process started to handle item 7.9.9, I would be happy to pitch in and help, I am just not certain where to start. Thanks, Josh From: Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 6:40 PM To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Cc: Marquart, Joshua D Subject: Re: Font Weight FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content. Regards, Glenn On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: I have a question about Font Weight. We're using Helvetica and using FOP to take the FO file and generate it as both (1) a PostScript file and (2) a TIFF file. Additionally, we are able to use third-party software to take the PostScript file and convert it directly to a second TIFF file (for comparison reasons). Of course, the fonts on the TIFF from FOP are a little pixilated and the "normal" font could stand to be rendered a bit darker. I am using Helvetica and tried to set the font-weight to 500 or 600, but it gets replaced with weight 400, which is apparently the "normal" Helvetica font registered in the system. Font-weight Bold and values of 800 and 900 use the "bold" Helvetica which is weight 700. Is there an easy way to use / access a darker 500 or 600 weight Helvetica, or possibly render the or am I really sunk here? I've already extended the Java2DRenderer, for my own purposes. The following Graphics2D rendering hints don't seem to do much when included: graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_FRACTIONALMETRICS, RenderingHints.VALUE_FRACTIONALMETRICS_ON); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_ANTIALIAS_ON); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_TEXT_ANTIALIASING, RenderingHints.VALUE_TEXT_ANTIALIAS_ON); graphics.setRenderingHint(RenderingHints.KEY_RENDERING, RenderingHint
Re: Font Weight
Josh, What you have not said yet is whether you actually have (on your system) a font with the desired weight or not. Specifically, do you actually have installed multiple font instances with the distinct weights you wish to reference? If you do not, then it doesn't do much good to discuss referring to them. On the other hand, if you do have distinct faces with weights 300, 500, 600, 800, 900, etc., installed, then it is merely a matter of ensuring that the reference in your FO file correctly maps to the associated font instance. That can be handled in different ways. So please answer whether you do have the fonts installed in the first place with these weights. G. On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Marquart, Joshua D < joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com> wrote: > “FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply > the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content.” > > > > I understand Fop doesn’t synthesize the weights. I understand that it has > two specific built-in weights (700 and 400) that are being used to replace > other weights per the following: > > > > When I set-up using a Java2DRenderer and specify the following FO content > snippets: > > > > line-height="13pt"> > > > > 900 Weight > > … > > 800 Weight > > … > > 700 Weight > > … > > 600 Weight > > … > > 500 Weight > > … > > 400 Weight > > … > > 300 Weight > > > > … > > > > the logger gives me the following information: > > > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,900" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,700". > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,800" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,700". > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,600" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,700". > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,500" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,400". > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,300" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,400". > > > > So I would need to supply very specific replacement fonts for > Helvetica,normal,900 ( and 800-300, not counting 400)? > > (Same as above when replacing Helvetica with Arial). > > > > I DO understand the following: > > > > 1- that per the current specs, item 7.9.9 for font-weight has a “TODO > font weights” message. > > 2 - that per the current build, the font classes generated from > Helvetica.xml and HelveticaBold.xml are used for 400 and 700 respectively > > 3 - that per the fuzzy replacement, 700 is used for 900-600 and 400 is used > for 500-100(probably). > > > > So my questions still stand > > 1 - is there a simpler way to use / access / apply a darker 500 or 600 > weight Helvetica and if so, what’s the best process to handle it given the > codebase? > > 2 - should I instead render a “Helvetica500.xml” and generate the > appropriate font class; obviously since that’s not yet been done with the > existing fop codebase, it is probably a lot more work than needed. > > 3 - Any other option I should pursue? > > > > If there is a process started to handle item 7.9.9, I would be happy to > pitch in and help, I am just not certain where to start. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Josh > > > > > > *From:* Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, March 08, 2011 6:40 PM > *To:* fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org > *Cc:* Marquart, Joshua D > *Subject:* Re: Font Weight > > > > FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply > the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content. > > > > Regards, > > Glenn > > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Marquart, Joshua D < > joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com> wrote: > > I have a question about Font Weight. > > > > We’re using Helvetica and using FOP to take the FO file and generate it as > both (1) a PostScript file and (2) a TIFF file. > > > > Additionally, we are able to use third-party software to take the > PostScript file and convert it directly to a second TIFF file (for > comparison reasons). > > > > Of course, the fonts on the TIFF from FOP are a little pixilated and the > “normal” font could stand to be rendered a bit darker. > > > > I am using Helvetica and tried to set the font-weight to 500 or 600, but it > gets replaced with weight 400, which is apparently the “normal” Helvetica > font registered in the system. > > Font-weight Bold and values of 800 and 900 use the “bold” Helvetica which &
RE: Font Weight
I was just doing research on this topic, came back here to supplement my message with info, and saw you already beat me to it. Helpful method: getFontInfo().dumpAllTripletsToSystemOut() So… yes, I do not have fonts installed for font weights of 300, 500, etc. and that would account for resolving to 400/700. The problem I’m seeing is when generating a PostScript and a Tiff from the same xsl-fo file. The text generated in the Tiff (for the 400 weight) appears much lighter than identical text in the PostScript and is likely due to using the Java2DRenderer vs. the PsRenderer. Oddly, when I set the font to Arial in the xsl-fo: - the font in the resulting PostScript appears Times Roman - the font in the resulting Tiff is identical to the font used in the Tiff when Helvetica was specified. Other than hunting down, installing and registering a weight 500 or so font for Helvetica or Arial (where might I find one? No idea.), are there other options that might I employ to lessen the lightness of the 400-weight ? Thanks, -Josh From: Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:02 PM To: Marquart, Joshua D Cc: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Re: Font Weight Josh, What you have not said yet is whether you actually have (on your system) a font with the desired weight or not. Specifically, do you actually have installed multiple font instances with the distinct weights you wish to reference? If you do not, then it doesn't do much good to discuss referring to them. On the other hand, if you do have distinct faces with weights 300, 500, 600, 800, 900, etc., installed, then it is merely a matter of ensuring that the reference in your FO file correctly maps to the associated font instance. That can be handled in different ways. So please answer whether you do have the fonts installed in the first place with these weights. G. On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: “FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content.” I understand Fop doesn’t synthesize the weights. I understand that it has two specific built-in weights (700 and 400) that are being used to replace other weights per the following: When I set-up using a Java2DRenderer and specify the following FO content snippets: 900 Weight … 800 Weight … 700 Weight … 600 Weight … 500 Weight … 400 Weight … 300 Weight … the logger gives me the following information: WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,900" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,800" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,600" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,500" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,400". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,300" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,400". So I would need to supply very specific replacement fonts for Helvetica,normal,900 ( and 800-300, not counting 400)? (Same as above when replacing Helvetica with Arial). I DO understand the following: 1- that per the current specs, item 7.9.9 for font-weight has a “TODO font weights” message. 2 - that per the current build, the font classes generated from Helvetica.xml and HelveticaBold.xml are used for 400 and 700 respectively 3 - that per the fuzzy replacement, 700 is used for 900-600 and 400 is used for 500-100(probably). So my questions still stand 1 - is there a simpler way to use / access / apply a darker 500 or 600 weight Helvetica and if so, what’s the best process to handle it given the codebase? 2 - should I instead render a “Helvetica500.xml” and generate the appropriate font class; obviously since that’s not yet been done with the existing fop codebase, it is probably a lot more work than needed. 3 - Any other option I should pursue? If there is a process started to handle item 7.9.9, I would be happy to pitch in and help, I am just not certain where to start. Thanks, Josh From: Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 6:40 PM To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Cc: Marquart, Joshua D Subject: Re: Font Weight FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content. Regards, Glenn On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 4:31 PM, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: I have a question about Font Weight. We’re using Helvetica and using FOP to take the FO file and generate it as both (1) a PostScript file and (2) a TIFF file. Additionally, we are able to use third-party software to take the PostScript file and convert it directly to a second TIFF file (for c
RE: Font Weight
1. If it's actually printing the wrong font that's a different issue. We'd have to see your font code for that. That would be everything in the font tags in the xconf file if you're using one, or your font loading method if you're using embedded code, plus the text in the fo which references the font triplet values. 2. What do you mean by lightness? Are you using the PSRenderer and/or TIFFRenderer to send output directly to a printer, to the same printer, back to back? Are you somehow using both renderers to generate image files to compare, or comparing something printed to something on the screen? Did you use the PSRenderer to send output directly to a printer and the TIFFRenderer to create an image file then send that image file to the printer? It sounds like we need more details on what you're trying to do. It sounds like you may be comparing apples to oranges. From: Marquart, Joshua D [mailto:joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:07 PM To: Glenn Adams Cc: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: RE: Font Weight I was just doing research on this topic, came back here to supplement my message with info, and saw you already beat me to it. Helpful method: getFontInfo().dumpAllTripletsToSystemOut() So... yes, I do not have fonts installed for font weights of 300, 500, etc. and that would account for resolving to 400/700. The problem I'm seeing is when generating a PostScript and a Tiff from the same xsl-fo file. The text generated in the Tiff (for the 400 weight) appears much lighter than identical text in the PostScript and is likely due to using the Java2DRenderer vs. the PsRenderer. Oddly, when I set the font to Arial in the xsl-fo: - the font in the resulting PostScript appears Times Roman - the font in the resulting Tiff is identical to the font used in the Tiff when Helvetica was specified. Other than hunting down, installing and registering a weight 500 or so font for Helvetica or Arial (where might I find one? No idea.), are there other options that might I employ to lessen the lightness of the 400-weight ? Thanks, -Josh From: Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:02 PM To: Marquart, Joshua D Cc: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Re: Font Weight Josh, What you have not said yet is whether you actually have (on your system) a font with the desired weight or not. Specifically, do you actually have installed multiple font instances with the distinct weights you wish to reference? If you do not, then it doesn't do much good to discuss referring to them. On the other hand, if you do have distinct faces with weights 300, 500, 600, 800, 900, etc., installed, then it is merely a matter of ensuring that the reference in your FO file correctly maps to the associated font instance. That can be handled in different ways. So please answer whether you do have the fonts installed in the first place with these weights. G. On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: "FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content." I understand Fop doesn't synthesize the weights. I understand that it has two specific built-in weights (700 and 400) that are being used to replace other weights per the following: When I set-up using a Java2DRenderer and specify the following FO content snippets: 900 Weight ... 800 Weight ... 700 Weight ... 600 Weight ... 500 Weight ... 400 Weight ... 300 Weight ... the logger gives me the following information: WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,900" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,800" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,600" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,500" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,400". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,300" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,400". So I would need to supply very specific replacement fonts for Helvetica,normal,900 ( and 800-300, not counting 400)? (Same as above when replacing Helvetica with Arial). I DO understand the following: 1- that per the current specs, item 7.9.9 for font-weight has a "TODO font weights" message. 2 - that per the current build, the font classes generated from Helvetica.xml and HelveticaBold.xml are used for 400 and 700 respectively 3 - that per the fuzzy replacement, 700 is used for 900-600 and 400 is used for 500-100(probably). So my questions still stand 1 - is there a simpler way to use / access / apply a darker 500 or 600 weight Helvetica and if so, what&
Re: Font Weight
I agree it there are differences between Java2DRenderer and PsRenderer that could account for this. Differences in anti-aliasing may also be at work here. I'm afraid I have exclusively used the PDFRenderer to date, so I can't offer more help on this difference. Perhaps another party may have something more to offer. G. On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Marquart, Joshua D < joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com> wrote: > I was just doing research on this topic, came back here to supplement my > message with info, and saw you already beat me to it. > > > > Helpful method: getFontInfo().dumpAllTripletsToSystemOut() > > > > So… yes, I do not have fonts installed for font weights of 300, 500, etc. > and that would account for resolving to 400/700. > > > > The problem I’m seeing is when generating a PostScript and a Tiff from the > same xsl-fo file. > > The text generated in the Tiff (for the 400 weight) appears much lighter > than identical text in the PostScript and is likely due to using the > Java2DRenderer vs. the PsRenderer. > > > > Oddly, when I set the font to Arial in the xsl-fo: > > - the font in the resulting PostScript appears Times Roman > > - the font in the resulting Tiff is identical to the font used in the Tiff > when Helvetica was specified. > > > > Other than hunting down, installing and registering a weight 500 or so font > for Helvetica or Arial (where might I find one? No idea.), are there other > options that might I employ to lessen the lightness of the 400-weight ? > > > > Thanks, > > > > -Josh > > > > *From:* Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] > *Sent:* Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:02 PM > *To:* Marquart, Joshua D > *Cc:* fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Font Weight > > > > Josh, > > > > What you have not said yet is whether you actually have (on your system) a > font with the desired weight or not. Specifically, do you actually have > installed multiple font instances with the distinct weights you wish to > reference? If you do not, then it doesn't do much good to discuss referring > to them. > > > > On the other hand, if you do have distinct faces with weights 300, 500, > 600, 800, 900, etc., installed, then it is merely a matter of ensuring that > the reference in your FO file correctly maps to the associated font > instance. That can be handled in different ways. > > > > So please answer whether you do have the fonts installed in the first place > with these weights. > > > > G. > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Marquart, Joshua D < > joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com> wrote: > > “FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply > the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content.” > > > > I understand Fop doesn’t synthesize the weights. I understand that it has > two specific built-in weights (700 and 400) that are being used to replace > other weights per the following: > > > > When I set-up using a Java2DRenderer and specify the following FO content > snippets: > > > > line-height="13pt"> > > > > 900 Weight > > … > > 800 Weight > > … > > 700 Weight > > … > > 600 Weight > > … > > 500 Weight > > … > > 400 Weight > > … > > 300 Weight > > > > … > > > > the logger gives me the following information: > > > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,900" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,700". > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,800" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,700". > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,600" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,700". > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,500" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,400". > > WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,300" not found. Substituting with > "Helvetica,normal,400". > > > > So I would need to supply very specific replacement fonts for > Helvetica,normal,900 ( and 800-300, not counting 400)? > > (Same as above when replacing Helvetica with Arial). > > > > I DO understand the following: > > > > 1- that per the current specs, item 7.9.9 for font-weight has a “TODO > font weights” message. > > 2 - that per the current build, the font classes generated from > Helvetica.xml and HelveticaBold.xml are used for 400 and 700 respectively > > 3 - that per the fuzzy replacement, 700 is used for 900-600 and 400 is used > for 500-100(probably). > > > > So my questions still
RE: Font Weight
I tested all the renderers. The TIFFRenderer created an image file and I didn't like it. The PSRenderer didn't like my TTFs. The PDFRenderer works for generating PDF documents and sending output indirectly to the printer. I actually use embedded code and pass a PDFRenderer to the FOUserAgent then get the output in PDF format from the transform in a stream and pass it into the load of PDDocument in the pdfbox project and use the java print job to print it. That has printed everything I've attempted to every printer we have. I'm also now using the PNGRenderer to get the output as images of pages to load into a custom preview window. This is working great. My preview window allows me to transform the document on the server and stream the output images to the client to display so I don't have to generate a transformer or renderer on the client machine and it's pretty fast (way faster than the FOP PreviewPanel). The PNGRenderer of course extends the Java2DRenderer. From: Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:37 PM To: Marquart, Joshua D Cc: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Re: Font Weight I agree it there are differences between Java2DRenderer and PsRenderer that could account for this. Differences in anti-aliasing may also be at work here. I'm afraid I have exclusively used the PDFRenderer to date, so I can't offer more help on this difference. Perhaps another party may have something more to offer. G. On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 12:06 PM, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: I was just doing research on this topic, came back here to supplement my message with info, and saw you already beat me to it. Helpful method: getFontInfo().dumpAllTripletsToSystemOut() So... yes, I do not have fonts installed for font weights of 300, 500, etc. and that would account for resolving to 400/700. The problem I'm seeing is when generating a PostScript and a Tiff from the same xsl-fo file. The text generated in the Tiff (for the 400 weight) appears much lighter than identical text in the PostScript and is likely due to using the Java2DRenderer vs. the PsRenderer. Oddly, when I set the font to Arial in the xsl-fo: - the font in the resulting PostScript appears Times Roman - the font in the resulting Tiff is identical to the font used in the Tiff when Helvetica was specified. Other than hunting down, installing and registering a weight 500 or so font for Helvetica or Arial (where might I find one? No idea.), are there other options that might I employ to lessen the lightness of the 400-weight ? Thanks, -Josh From: Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:02 PM To: Marquart, Joshua D Cc: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Re: Font Weight Josh, What you have not said yet is whether you actually have (on your system) a font with the desired weight or not. Specifically, do you actually have installed multiple font instances with the distinct weights you wish to reference? If you do not, then it doesn't do much good to discuss referring to them. On the other hand, if you do have distinct faces with weights 300, 500, 600, 800, 900, etc., installed, then it is merely a matter of ensuring that the reference in your FO file correctly maps to the associated font instance. That can be handled in different ways. So please answer whether you do have the fonts installed in the first place with these weights. G. On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: "FOP does not synthesize fonts with different weights. You need to supply the fonts with the weights you specify in FO content." I understand Fop doesn't synthesize the weights. I understand that it has two specific built-in weights (700 and 400) that are being used to replace other weights per the following: When I set-up using a Java2DRenderer and specify the following FO content snippets: 900 Weight ... 800 Weight ... 700 Weight ... 600 Weight ... 500 Weight ... 400 Weight ... 300 Weight ... the logger gives me the following information: WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,900" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica,normal,800" not found. Substituting with "Helvetica,normal,700". WARNING: Font "Helvetica
RE: Font Weight
The process that we have to take user-generated input and end up with a G4 TIFF file. The current process is like this: 1 - We've got a front-end system that generates HTML from XSLT with a flag for input purposes (input form fields are generated), or output style. 2 - Generated html is passed through a transformer with html_to_fo.xsl applied to create XSL-FO data. 3a - Today, we take the resulting XSL-FO data and use FOP to generate a PostScript file, which is sent to a legacy third party library that transforms the PostScript into a beautiful near-identical G4 TIFF. For technical reasons, we have to stop using the third party library which is both EOL and creates issues (the library does not ignore a console shutdown signal and kills the service). 3b - Tomorrow, I'd like to just take the resulting XSL-FO data and generate the G4 TIFF files using FOP (hence my TIFF-focused Buzilla contributions 49695, 49696 and 50657) . At the moment, I'm just straight generating the TIFF from the XSL-FO data. It mostly looks like the source, but for some reason the lesser fonts are a lot lighter. It's my understating that Fop is output-only when it comes to PostScript, correct? For comparison purposes, I'm generating the PostScript and Tiff files as flat files. Then I 1 - compare them side-by-side on the screen 2 - throw them both at a printer (and make sure the Tiff is sent through PhotoShop and not shrunk to fit). The printouts line up physically, but the font for any 10pt in the Tiff is much lighter (likely due to aliasing) than that produced with the PostScript, or even that produced by a Tiff that has undergone the process described in 3a above. With the "Oddly" comment quoted below, apparently the PostScript deferred to "any,normal,400" and "any,normal,700" when confronted with "Arial,normal,400", which is not a big deal because my eventual goal is removing the PostScript. -Josh From: Eric Douglas [mailto:edoug...@blockhouse.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:18 PM To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: RE: Font Weight 1. If it's actually printing the wrong font that's a different issue. We'd have to see your font code for that. That would be everything in the font tags in the xconf file if you're using one, or your font loading method if you're using embedded code, plus the text in the fo which references the font triplet values. 2. What do you mean by lightness? Are you using the PSRenderer and/or TIFFRenderer to send output directly to a printer, to the same printer, back to back? Are you somehow using both renderers to generate image files to compare, or comparing something printed to something on the screen? Did you use the PSRenderer to send output directly to a printer and the TIFFRenderer to create an image file then send that image file to the printer? It sounds like we need more details on what you're trying to do. It sounds like you may be comparing apples to oranges. From: Marquart, Joshua D [mailto:joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:07 PM To: Glenn Adams Cc: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: RE: Font Weight I was just doing research on this topic, came back here to supplement my message with info, and saw you already beat me to it. Helpful method: getFontInfo().dumpAllTripletsToSystemOut() So... yes, I do not have fonts installed for font weights of 300, 500, etc. and that would account for resolving to 400/700. The problem I'm seeing is when generating a PostScript and a Tiff from the same xsl-fo file. The text generated in the Tiff (for the 400 weight) appears much lighter than identical text in the PostScript and is likely due to using the Java2DRenderer vs. the PsRenderer. Oddly, when I set the font to Arial in the xsl-fo: - the font in the resulting PostScript appears Times Roman - the font in the resulting Tiff is identical to the font used in the Tiff when Helvetica was specified. Other than hunting down, installing and registering a weight 500 or so font for Helvetica or Arial (where might I find one? No idea.), are there other options that might I employ to lessen the lightness of the 400-weight ? Thanks, -Josh From: Glenn Adams [mailto:gl...@skynav.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 12:02 PM To: Marquart, Joshua D Cc: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Re: Font Weight Josh, What you have not said yet is whether you actually have (on your system) a font with the desired weight or not. Specifically, do you actually have installed multiple font instances with the distinct weights you wish to reference? If you do not, then it doesn't do much good to discuss referring to them. On the other hand, if you do have distinct faces with weights 300, 500, 600, 800, 900, etc., installed, t
Re: Font Weight
Hi Guys, Sorry to jump onto this so late in the game, but if you're trying to using TTF fonts with PostScript there is a branch called Temp_TrueTypeInPostScript which may help you. It allows you to embed TTFs in the PostScript which will mean you won't have to have the font installed on your printer and you can reference the font-file from your fop.xconf. If you have any issues I'd be more than happy to help. Mehdi On 9 March 2011 21:24, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: > The process that we have to take user-generated input and end up with a G4 > TIFF file. > > > > The current process is like this: > > > > 1 - We’ve got a front-end system that generates HTML from XSLT with a flag > for input purposes (input form fields are generated), or output style. > > 2 - Generated html is passed through a transformer with html_to_fo.xsl > applied to create XSL-FO data. > > 3a - Today, we take the resulting XSL-FO data and use FOP to generate a > PostScript file, which is sent to a legacy third party library that > transforms the PostScript into a beautiful near-identical G4 TIFF. > > > > For technical reasons, we have to stop using the third party library which > is both EOL and creates issues (the library does not ignore a console > shutdown signal and kills the service). > > > > 3b - Tomorrow, I’d like to just take the resulting XSL-FO data and generate > the G4 TIFF files using FOP (hence my TIFF-focused Buzilla contributions > 49695, 49696 and 50657) . > > > > At the moment, I’m just straight generating the TIFF from the XSL-FO data. > It mostly looks like the source, but for some reason the lesser fonts are a > lot lighter. > > > > It’s my understating that Fop is output-only when it comes to PostScript, > correct? > > > > For comparison purposes, I’m generating the PostScript and Tiff files as > flat files. > > Then I > > 1 - compare them side-by-side on the screen > > 2 - throw them both at a printer (and make sure the Tiff is sent through > PhotoShop and not shrunk to fit). > > > > The printouts line up physically, but the font for any 10pt in the Tiff is > much lighter (likely due to aliasing) than that produced with the > PostScript, or even that produced by a Tiff that has undergone the process > described in 3a above. > > > > With the “Oddly” comment quoted below, apparently the PostScript deferred to > “any,normal,400” and “any,normal,700” when confronted with > “Arial,normal,400”, which is not a big deal because my eventual goal is > removing the PostScript. > > > > -Josh > > > > From: Eric Douglas [mailto:edoug...@blockhouse.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:18 PM > > To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org > Subject: RE: Font Weight > > > > 1. If it's actually printing the wrong font that's a different issue. We'd > have to see your font code for that. That would be everything in the font > tags in the xconf file if you're using one, or your font loading method if > you're using embedded code, plus the text in the fo which references the > font triplet values. > > 2. What do you mean by lightness? Are you using the PSRenderer and/or > TIFFRenderer to send output directly to a printer, to the same printer, back > to back? Are you somehow using both renderers to generate image files to > compare, or comparing something printed to something on the screen? Did you > use the PSRenderer to send output directly to a printer and the TIFFRenderer > to create an image file then send that image file to the printer? It sounds > like we need more details on what you're trying to do. It sounds like you > may be comparing apples to oranges. > > > > > > > > From: Marquart, Joshua D [mailto:joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:07 PM > To: Glenn Adams > Cc: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org > Subject: RE: Font Weight > > I was just doing research on this topic, came back here to supplement my > message with info, and saw you already beat me to it. > > > > Helpful method: getFontInfo().dumpAllTripletsToSystemOut() > > > > So… yes, I do not have fonts installed for font weights of 300, 500, etc. > and that would account for resolving to 400/700. > > > > The problem I’m seeing is when generating a PostScript and a Tiff from the > same xsl-fo file. > > The text generated in the Tiff (for the 400 weight) appears much lighter > than identical text in the PostScript and is likely due to using the > Java2DRenderer vs. the PsRenderer. > > > > Oddly, when I set the font to Arial in the xsl-fo: > > - the font
RE: Font Weight
Thanks Medhi, but as I've explained we're trying to move away from producing PostScript files and instead produce TIFF files. Our old practice: produce a PostScript via FOP and use a third-party software to convert to TIFF. Our future practice: just produce the TIFF via FOP. My goal is to get the font to render a bit darker in the TIFF than it is being produced at this time in order to come closer to the quality of the image produced by PostScript then converting to TIFF. -Josh -Original Message- From: mehdi houshmand [mailto:med1...@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 3:10 AM To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org Subject: Re: Font Weight Hi Guys, Sorry to jump onto this so late in the game, but if you're trying to using TTF fonts with PostScript there is a branch called Temp_TrueTypeInPostScript which may help you. It allows you to embed TTFs in the PostScript which will mean you won't have to have the font installed on your printer and you can reference the font-file from your fop.xconf. If you have any issues I'd be more than happy to help. Mehdi On 9 March 2011 21:24, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: > The process that we have to take user-generated input and end up with a G4 > TIFF file. > > > > The current process is like this: > > > > 1 - We've got a front-end system that generates HTML from XSLT with a flag > for input purposes (input form fields are generated), or output style. > > 2 - Generated html is passed through a transformer with html_to_fo.xsl > applied to create XSL-FO data. > > 3a - Today, we take the resulting XSL-FO data and use FOP to generate a > PostScript file, which is sent to a legacy third party library that > transforms the PostScript into a beautiful near-identical G4 TIFF. > > > > For technical reasons, we have to stop using the third party library which > is both EOL and creates issues (the library does not ignore a console > shutdown signal and kills the service). > > > > 3b - Tomorrow, I'd like to just take the resulting XSL-FO data and generate > the G4 TIFF files using FOP (hence my TIFF-focused Buzilla contributions > 49695, 49696 and 50657) . > > > > At the moment, I'm just straight generating the TIFF from the XSL-FO data. > It mostly looks like the source, but for some reason the lesser fonts are a > lot lighter. > > > > It's my understating that Fop is output-only when it comes to PostScript, > correct? > > > > For comparison purposes, I'm generating the PostScript and Tiff files as > flat files. > > Then I > > 1 - compare them side-by-side on the screen > > 2 - throw them both at a printer (and make sure the Tiff is sent through > PhotoShop and not shrunk to fit). > > > > The printouts line up physically, but the font for any 10pt in the Tiff is > much lighter (likely due to aliasing) than that produced with the > PostScript, or even that produced by a Tiff that has undergone the process > described in 3a above. > > > > With the "Oddly" comment quoted below, apparently the PostScript deferred to > "any,normal,400" and "any,normal,700" when confronted with > "Arial,normal,400", which is not a big deal because my eventual goal is > removing the PostScript. > > > > -Josh > > > > From: Eric Douglas [mailto:edoug...@blockhouse.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:18 PM > > To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org > Subject: RE: Font Weight > > > > 1. If it's actually printing the wrong font that's a different issue. We'd > have to see your font code for that. That would be everything in the font > tags in the xconf file if you're using one, or your font loading method if > you're using embedded code, plus the text in the fo which references the > font triplet values. > > 2. What do you mean by lightness? Are you using the PSRenderer and/or > TIFFRenderer to send output directly to a printer, to the same printer, back > to back? Are you somehow using both renderers to generate image files to > compare, or comparing something printed to something on the screen? Did you > use the PSRenderer to send output directly to a printer and the TIFFRenderer > to create an image file then send that image file to the printer? It sounds > like we need more details on what you're trying to do. It sounds like you > may be comparing apples to oranges. > > > > > > > > From: Marquart, Joshua D [mailto:joshua.marqu...@firstdata.com] > Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:07 PM > To: Glenn Adams > Cc: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org > Subject: RE: Font Weight > > I was just doing research o
Re: Font Weight
My apologies for the confusion, I saw that you were suggesting as such in your last email but thought you might not have known about that branch. I'm not that familiar with the Java2D rendering, sorry I couldn't be of more help. Mehdi On 10 March 2011 15:17, Marquart, Joshua D wrote: > Thanks Medhi, but as I've explained we're trying to move away from producing > PostScript files and instead produce TIFF files. > > Our old practice: produce a PostScript via FOP and use a third-party software > to convert to TIFF. > Our future practice: just produce the TIFF via FOP. > > My goal is to get the font to render a bit darker in the TIFF than it is > being produced at this time in order to come closer to the quality of the > image produced by PostScript then converting to TIFF. > > -Josh > > -Original Message- > From: mehdi houshmand [mailto:med1...@gmail.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 10, 2011 3:10 AM > To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org > Subject: Re: Font Weight > > Hi Guys, > > Sorry to jump onto this so late in the game, but if you're trying to > using TTF fonts with PostScript there is a branch called > Temp_TrueTypeInPostScript which may help you. It allows you to embed > TTFs in the PostScript which will mean you won't have to have the font > installed on your printer and you can reference the font-file from > your fop.xconf. If you have any issues I'd be more than happy to help. > > Mehdi > > On 9 March 2011 21:24, Marquart, Joshua D > wrote: >> The process that we have to take user-generated input and end up with a G4 >> TIFF file. >> >> >> >> The current process is like this: >> >> >> >> 1 - We've got a front-end system that generates HTML from XSLT with a flag >> for input purposes (input form fields are generated), or output style. >> >> 2 - Generated html is passed through a transformer with html_to_fo.xsl >> applied to create XSL-FO data. >> >> 3a - Today, we take the resulting XSL-FO data and use FOP to generate a >> PostScript file, which is sent to a legacy third party library that >> transforms the PostScript into a beautiful near-identical G4 TIFF. >> >> >> >> For technical reasons, we have to stop using the third party library which >> is both EOL and creates issues (the library does not ignore a console >> shutdown signal and kills the service). >> >> >> >> 3b - Tomorrow, I'd like to just take the resulting XSL-FO data and generate >> the G4 TIFF files using FOP (hence my TIFF-focused Buzilla contributions >> 49695, 49696 and 50657) . >> >> >> >> At the moment, I'm just straight generating the TIFF from the XSL-FO data. >> It mostly looks like the source, but for some reason the lesser fonts are a >> lot lighter. >> >> >> >> It's my understating that Fop is output-only when it comes to PostScript, >> correct? >> >> >> >> For comparison purposes, I'm generating the PostScript and Tiff files as >> flat files. >> >> Then I >> >> 1 - compare them side-by-side on the screen >> >> 2 - throw them both at a printer (and make sure the Tiff is sent through >> PhotoShop and not shrunk to fit). >> >> >> >> The printouts line up physically, but the font for any 10pt in the Tiff is >> much lighter (likely due to aliasing) than that produced with the >> PostScript, or even that produced by a Tiff that has undergone the process >> described in 3a above. >> >> >> >> With the "Oddly" comment quoted below, apparently the PostScript deferred to >> "any,normal,400" and "any,normal,700" when confronted with >> "Arial,normal,400", which is not a big deal because my eventual goal is >> removing the PostScript. >> >> >> >> -Josh >> >> >> >> From: Eric Douglas [mailto:edoug...@blockhouse.com] >> Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:18 PM >> >> To: fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org >> Subject: RE: Font Weight >> >> >> >> 1. If it's actually printing the wrong font that's a different issue. We'd >> have to see your font code for that. That would be everything in the font >> tags in the xconf file if you're using one, or your font loading method if >> you're using embedded code, plus the text in the fo which references the >> font triplet values. >> >> 2. What do you mean by lightness? Are you using the PSRenderer and/or >> TIFFRenderer to send output dire
font-weight: bolder
Hi all. Is there a particular reason why when I have a font-weight="bolder", it doesn't actually make the text any bolder? font-weight="bold" works as one would expect. Daniel Noll Nuix Pty Ltd Suite 79, 89 Jones St, Ultimo NSW 2007, AustraliaPh: +61 2 9280 0699 Web: http://nuix.com/ Fax: +61 2 9212 6902 This message is intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this message or attachment is strictly prohibited. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: font-weight: bolder
Hi Daniel, Daniel Noll a écrit : > Hi all. > > Is there a particular reason why when I have a font-weight="bolder", it > doesn't actually make the text any bolder? Perhaps because "bolder" isn't implemented yet... :-\ http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/compliance.html#fo-property-font-weight Vincent > > font-weight="bold" works as one would expect. > > Daniel Noll > > Nuix Pty Ltd > Suite 79, 89 Jones St, Ultimo NSW 2007, AustraliaPh: +61 2 9280 0699 > Web: http://nuix.com/ Fax: +61 2 9212 6902 - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: font-weight: bolder
- Original Message - From: "Vincent Hennebert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2007 7:16 PM Subject: Re: font-weight: bolder Hi Daniel, Daniel Noll a écrit : Hi all. Is there a particular reason why when I have a font-weight="bolder", it doesn't actually make the text any bolder? Perhaps because "bolder" isn't implemented yet... :-\ http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/compliance.html#fo-property-font-weight Ah. Whoops, should have known to check that list. I wonder why it wasn't just aliased to "bold" until a better option became available. The sad thing is that tools like CSS2XSLFO output "bolder" for a tag, so I have to post-process its FO to change them all to bold. Daniel Noll Nuix Pty Ltd Suite 79, 89 Jones St, Ultimo NSW 2007, AustraliaPh: +61 2 9280 0699 Web: http://nuix.com/ Fax: +61 2 9212 6902 This message is intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this message or attachment is strictly prohibited. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: font-weight: bolder
On Mar 14, 2007, at 02:41, Daniel Noll wrote: Is there a particular reason why when I have a font- weight="bolder", it doesn't actually make the text any bolder? Perhaps because "bolder" isn't implemented yet... :-\ http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/compliance.html#fo-property-font- weight I wonder why it wasn't just aliased to "bold" until a better option became available. Weird, the property resolution code to compute the correct value for "bolder" seems to be OK, so I always thought this was implemented, but now that you mention it, I went looking and it seems no tests have been added to check for this. The sad thing is that tools like CSS2XSLFO output "bolder" for a tag, so I have to post-process its FO to change them all to bold. As a temporary workaround, one could easily implement that post- processing via XSLT. Identity transform for everything but the attribute "font-weight" when it has a value of "bolder". Anyway, I'm going to look into this ASAP. Cheers, Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: font-weight: bolder
On Mar 14, 2007, at 20:05, Andreas L Delmelle wrote: On Mar 14, 2007, at 02:41, Daniel Noll wrote: Is there a particular reason why when I have a font- weight="bolder", it doesn't actually make the text any bolder? Perhaps because "bolder" isn't implemented yet... :-\ http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/compliance.html#fo-property- font-weight I wonder why it wasn't just aliased to "bold" until a better option became available. Weird, the property resolution code to compute the correct value for "bolder" seems to be OK, so I always thought this was implemented, but now that you mention it, I went looking and it seems no tests have been added to check for this. Just checked it and, contrary to what I seemed to remember, the properties' values are not OK Plus, FOP's font-subsystem that apparently doesn't know what to do with it yet... (see FontState.getFontState()) First, I'll see if the replacement of the keywords by a numerical value (normal=400, bold=700) cannot be done during property resolution. Then it still becomes a matter of teaching the font- subsystem to do something sensible with those values. Note that numeric values in the range '100' to '500' currently all have the same result as 'normal', and the values '600' to '900' are interpreted simply as bold. Cheers, Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: font-weight: bolder
On Mar 14, 2007, at 20:30, Andreas L Delmelle wrote: (see FontState.getFontState()) Sorry, make that CommonFont.getFontState()... Later Andreas - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: font-weight: bolder
- Original Message - From: "Andreas L Delmelle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2007 6:05 AM Subject: Re: font-weight: bolder On Mar 14, 2007, at 02:41, Daniel Noll wrote: Is there a particular reason why when I have a font- weight="bolder", it doesn't actually make the text any bolder? Perhaps because "bolder" isn't implemented yet... :-\ http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/compliance.html#fo-property-font- weight I wonder why it wasn't just aliased to "bold" until a better option became available. Weird, the property resolution code to compute the correct value for "bolder" seems to be OK, so I always thought this was implemented, but now that you mention it, I went looking and it seems no tests have been added to check for this. The sad thing is that tools like CSS2XSLFO output "bolder" for a tag, so I have to post-process its FO to change them all to bold. As a temporary workaround, one could easily implement that post- processing via XSLT. Identity transform for everything but the attribute "font-weight" when it has a value of "bolder". That's basically what I'm doing. In actual fact I'm doing it with a custom XMLFilter which I figured should be slightly faster. I had to use a custom filter anyway because I also had to fix its output to quote font family names with spaces in them (I can nuke that hack once the next stable FOP comes out, of course.) Daniel Noll Nuix Pty Ltd Suite 79, 89 Jones St, Ultimo NSW 2007, AustraliaPh: +61 2 9280 0699 Web: http://nuix.com/ Fax: +61 2 9212 6902 This message is intended only for the named recipient. If you are not the intended recipient you are notified that disclosing, copying, distributing or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this message or attachment is strictly prohibited. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
png renderer: incorrect formatting of font-weight
Hi all, I have a strange problem generating png-images with FOP 0.94: When I use font-weight="bold" in an fo:block or fo:inline-element, only the first tag of each image (when there are more images, i.e. pages) will be bold! When I render it as pdf it's as it should be. The text-decoration="underline" is correctly transformed for each fo:block. Can I fix this problem by using different XSL-Code (see Code-except below)? Or can I fix the problem in any other way? Thanks in advance! Franz --- Begin Code Excerpt --- --- End Code Excerpt --- -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/png-renderer%3A-incorrect-formatting-of-font-weight-tp17730501p17730501.html Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: png renderer: incorrect formatting of font-weight
Franz, I cannot reproduce your problem. I've tried with Sun JVMs 1.4.2, 1.5 and 6 and there were no anomalies. Can you post a complete FO file that shows your problem? And can you please state what JVM and operating system you're using? On 09.06.2008 13:00:23 fma-001 wrote: > > Hi all, > > I have a strange problem generating png-images with FOP 0.94: When I use > font-weight="bold" in an fo:block or fo:inline-element, only the first tag > of each image (when there are more images, i.e. pages) will be bold! When I > render it as pdf it's as it should be. The text-decoration="underline" is > correctly transformed for each fo:block. > > Can I fix this problem by using different XSL-Code (see Code-except below)? > Or can I fix the problem in any other way? > > Thanks in advance! > Franz > > --- Begin Code Excerpt --- > padding-bottom="3pt"> >select="$inhalt"/> > > --- End Code Excerpt --- > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/png-renderer%3A-incorrect-formatting-of-font-weight-tp17730501p17730501.html > Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: png renderer: incorrect formatting of font-weight
Jeremias, I enclosed the XSL, the input XML and the output.png; I tried it from console using Java 1.4.2 under Win XP. The destination system is a Java-Sytem on Linux, but i haven't tried it on that. Appriciate any clues to fix the problem, Franz Jeremias Maerki-2 wrote: > > Franz, > > I cannot reproduce your problem. I've tried with Sun JVMs 1.4.2, 1.5 and > 6 and there were no anomalies. Can you post a complete FO file that > shows your problem? And can you please state what JVM and operating > system you're using? > > Jeremias Maerki > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://www.nabble.com/file/p17780624/FOP_Document_View_test.xsl FOP_Document_View_test.xsl http://www.nabble.com/file/p17780624/rssInfoModell_kicker.xml rssInfoModell_kicker.xml http://www.nabble.com/file/p17780624/rssInfoModell_kicker.png rssInfoModell_kicker.png -- View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/png-renderer%3A-incorrect-formatting-of-font-weight-tp17730501p17780624.html Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: png renderer: incorrect formatting of font-weight
Franz, I said FO file, not XML + XSLT. XSLT is extensible and customizations sometimes make it hard to easily set up a stylesheet in a different environment. Luckily that wasn't the case here. Please send an FO file next time. Thanks! Anyway, I've managed to reproduce the problem in Java 1.4.2, but not in 1.5 and 6. So this smells like a problem in the 1.4.2 class library. Can you upgrade to a different JVM? If not, I guess you're up for a difficult debugging session to determine what the problem could be. I'm afraid I have no time to do this at the moment. Maybe you can also find some additional information on the net. You're probably not the first one to stumble over this. Of course, it could still be that FOP does something problematic. But without knowing what exactly causes this it's difficult to do something about it. On 11.06.2008 17:31:02 fma-001 wrote: > > Jeremias, > > I enclosed the XSL, the input XML and the output.png; I tried it from > console using Java 1.4.2 under Win XP. The destination system is a > Java-Sytem on Linux, but i haven't tried it on that. > > Appriciate any clues to fix the problem, > Franz > > > Jeremias Maerki-2 wrote: > > > > Franz, > > > > I cannot reproduce your problem. I've tried with Sun JVMs 1.4.2, 1.5 and > > 6 and there were no anomalies. Can you post a complete FO file that > > shows your problem? And can you please state what JVM and operating > > system you're using? > > > > Jeremias Maerki > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > http://www.nabble.com/file/p17780624/FOP_Document_View_test.xsl > FOP_Document_View_test.xsl > http://www.nabble.com/file/p17780624/rssInfoModell_kicker.xml > rssInfoModell_kicker.xml > http://www.nabble.com/file/p17780624/rssInfoModell_kicker.png > rssInfoModell_kicker.png > -- > View this message in context: > http://www.nabble.com/png-renderer%3A-incorrect-formatting-of-font-weight-tp17730501p17780624.html > Sent from the FOP - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Problem with font-weight 'bold' for custom font
Hi everybody, switching to the fop-0.93 engine, i am facing problems with the pdf-rendering for font-weight=bold for my custom font 'NewsGothic'. The font is found by the engine, but is rendered only a bit wider, not bold. I am using the following configuration: . D:/fonts/ flate The engine is running on a windows system with a j2re1.4.2_11. Any help is highly appreciated! Best regards, Ben - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fw: font-weight and font-family not working together
Hi, I am Ismail Khan, I am mailing for the first time in fop mailing list. Please apologize for any mistakes. In our application we are using FOP 0.20 to convert XML to PDF. When I am specifying font-family as ARIAL and font-weight as BOLD, bold effect is not happening. Following is the XSL snippet Following is the XML snippet This Sample Text Text is displayed in BOLD with default font. This Sample Text Text is displayed in ARIAL font This Sample Text Text is displayed in ARIAL font but without BOLD I tried change the XSL as below, then to it is not working. Following is the Userconfig.xml file entry for ARIAL. No any help on this would be really helpful. Thanks in Advance. | Thanks & Regards | Ismail Khan This e-Mail may contain proprietary and confidential information and is sent for the intended recipient(s) only. If by an addressing or transmission error this mail has been misdirected to you, you are requested to delete this mail immediately. You are also hereby notified that any use, any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/or publication of this e-mail message, contents or its attachment other than by its intended recipient/s is strictly prohibited. Visit us at http://www.polaris.co.in - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: font-weight and font-family not working together
You have to register "ARIALBD.TTF", "ARIALI.TTF" and "ARIALBI.TTF" as seperate font elements in addition to the first entry (with only one font-triplet). Otherwise, you won't get the bold and italic variants. On 18.03.2008 06:16:32 ismail.khan wrote: > > Hi, > > I am Ismail Khan, I am mailing for the first time in fop mailing list. > Please apologize for any mistakes. > > In our application we are using FOP 0.20 to convert XML to PDF. When I am > specifying font-family as ARIAL and font-weight as BOLD, bold effect is not > happening. > > > Following is the XSL snippet > >white-space-collapse="false"> > > > > >font-family="monospace" white-space-collapse="false"> > > > > > Following is the XML snippet > This Sample Text > Text is displayed in BOLD with default font. > This Sample Text > Text is displayed in ARIAL font > This Sample Text > Text is displayed in ARIAL font but without BOLD > > I tried change the XSL as below, then to it is not working. > >font-family="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" white-space-collapse="false"> > > > > > Following is the Userconfig.xml file entry for ARIAL. > kerning="yes"> > > > > > > > No any help on this would be really helpful. > > Thanks in Advance. > > | Thanks & Regards > | Ismail Khan > > > > This e-Mail may contain proprietary and confidential information and is sent > for the intended recipient(s) only. If by an addressing or transmission > error this mail has been misdirected to you, you are requested to delete this > mail immediately. You are also hereby notified that any use, any form of > reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution > and/or publication of this e-mail message, contents or its attachment other > than by its intended recipient/s is strictly prohibited. > > Visit us at http://www.polaris.co.in > Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: font-weight and font-family not working together
Hi Jeremias Maerki, Thanks, your solution is working fine. | Thanks & Regards | Ismail Khan Jeremias Maerki <[EMAIL PROTECTED] rki.ch>To fop-users@xmlgraphics.apache.org 03/18/2008 12:20 cc PM Subject Re: font-weight and font-family not Please respond to working together [EMAIL PROTECTED] hics.apache.org You have to register "ARIALBD.TTF", "ARIALI.TTF" and "ARIALBI.TTF" as seperate font elements in addition to the first entry (with only one font-triplet). Otherwise, you won't get the bold and italic variants. On 18.03.2008 06:16:32 ismail.khan wrote: > > Hi, > > I am Ismail Khan, I am mailing for the first time in fop mailing list. > Please apologize for any mistakes. > > In our application we are using FOP 0.20 to convert XML to PDF. When I am > specifying font-family as ARIAL and font-weight as BOLD, bold effect is not > happening. > > > Following is the XSL snippet > >white-space-collapse="false"> > > > > >font-family="monospace" white-space-collapse="false"> > > > > > Following is the XML snippet > This Sample Text > Text is displayed in BOLD with default font. > This Sample Text > Text is displayed in ARIAL font > This Sample Text > Text is displayed in ARIAL font but without BOLD > > I tried change the XSL as below, then to it is not working. > >font-family="[EMAIL PROTECTED]" white-space-collapse="false"> > > > > > Following is the Userconfig.xml file entry for ARIAL. > kerning="yes"> > > > > > > > No any help on this would be really helpful. > > Thanks in Advance. > > | Thanks & Regards > | Ismail Khan > > > > This e-Mail may contain proprietary and confidential information and is sent for the intended recipient(s) only. If by an addressing or transmission error this mail has been misdirected to you, you are requested to delete this mail immediately. You are also hereby notified that any use, any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/or publication of this e-mail message, contents or its attachment other than by its intended recipient/s is strictly prohibited. > > Visit us at http://www.polaris.co.in > Jeremias Maerki - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This e-Mail may contain proprietary and confidential information and is sent for the intended recipient(s) only. If by an addressing or transmission error this mail has been misdirected to you, you are requested to delete this mail immediately. You are also hereby notified that any use, any form of reproduction, dissemination, copying, disclosure, modification, distribution and/or publication of this e-mail message, contents or its attachment other than by its intended recipient/s is strictly prohibited. Visit us at http://www.polaris.co.in - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem with font-weight 'bold' for custom font
On Thursday 15 March 2007 20:16, Benjamin Schupp wrote: > Hi everybody, > > switching to the fop-0.93 engine, i am facing problems with the > pdf-rendering for font-weight=bold for my custom font 'NewsGothic'. > The font is found by the engine, but is rendered only a bit wider, > not bold. I am using the following configuration: > > > . > D:/fonts/ > > > > flate > > > embed-file="lte50112.ttf"> style="normal" weight="normal" /> > embed-file="lte50114.ttf"> style="normal" weight="bold" /> > > > > > > The engine is running on a windows system with a j2re1.4.2_11. > Any help is highly appreciated! > Ben, does what is rendered actually match the glyphs as defined in the font, that is does it match what a basic font viewer would show (not what for example MS Word would make out of it)? The reason for the question is that (some) word processors can generate bold fonts from normal fonts by rendering the same glyph multiple times with a slight offset. FOP does not do that. It embeds the font unchanged and without any additional rendering instructions into the PDF (assuming you generate PDF). > Best regards, > Ben > Manuel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem with font-weight 'bold' for custom font
Hi Manuel, for some reason it now suddenly works ok!? thanx for your help anyways! Best regards, Ben Manuel Mall wrote: On Thursday 15 March 2007 20:16, Benjamin Schupp wrote: Hi everybody, switching to the fop-0.93 engine, i am facing problems with the pdf-rendering for font-weight=bold for my custom font 'NewsGothic'. The font is found by the engine, but is rendered only a bit wider, not bold. I am using the following configuration: . D:/fonts/ flate The engine is running on a windows system with a j2re1.4.2_11. Any help is highly appreciated! Ben, does what is rendered actually match the glyphs as defined in the font, that is does it match what a basic font viewer would show (not what for example MS Word would make out of it)? The reason for the question is that (some) word processors can generate bold fonts from normal fonts by rendering the same glyph multiple times with a slight offset. FOP does not do that. It embeds the font unchanged and without any additional rendering instructions into the PDF (assuming you generate PDF). Best regards, Ben Manuel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Problem with font-weight 'bold' for custom font
Hi Manuel, now the bold font is not displayed correctly again. It's weird - I did not make any changes. Viewing the .ttf files with basic font viewers shows them correctly. Any clue where the problem could be located? All the best, Ben Benjamin Schupp wrote: Hi Manuel, for some reason it now suddenly works ok!? thanx for your help anyways! Best regards, Ben Manuel Mall wrote: On Thursday 15 March 2007 20:16, Benjamin Schupp wrote: Hi everybody, switching to the fop-0.93 engine, i am facing problems with the pdf-rendering for font-weight=bold for my custom font 'NewsGothic'. The font is found by the engine, but is rendered only a bit wider, not bold. I am using the following configuration: . D:/fonts/ flate The engine is running on a windows system with a j2re1.4.2_11. Any help is highly appreciated! Ben, does what is rendered actually match the glyphs as defined in the font, that is does it match what a basic font viewer would show (not what for example MS Word would make out of it)? The reason for the question is that (some) word processors can generate bold fonts from normal fonts by rendering the same glyph multiple times with a slight offset. FOP does not do that. It embeds the font unchanged and without any additional rendering instructions into the PDF (assuming you generate PDF). Best regards, Ben Manuel - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
