Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
From: Michael Everson [EMAIL PROTECTED] At 16:45 -0700 2003-06-20, Richard Cook wrote: Of course, in pop e-print, nearly everything that can be done to a character is done ... including Bold-Ital-Outline-Shadow ... Hey, there's no reason only Latin typography should be filled with vulgarism... If you just look at Japanese, you'll see that most Hiragana andKatakana text use both narrow (half-width) and square (full-width) style within the same font but with distinct characters. In Latin text, it is most often rendered with the same characters but with different fonts. Some typographic effects have different usage patterns between Latin/Greek/Cyrillic/ Hebrew and Asian text. Italic is one of these, and in HTML its use has been deprecated in favor of a more language neutral emphasized style (which can be right-slanted with Latin/Greek/Cyrillic, but can be a distinct font or typographic effect applied to some base font). In strict typographic terms, the italic style modifier is just a convenience to select actually distinct fonts. It's true that Arabic is, in its natural form, already right-slanted and would not support being more slanted than it is now. Slanting artificially a font which contains characters that are already slanted such as Arabic, or should not be slanted like Han is quite disastrous for the reader. Other typographic effects are much more language neutral such as font scaling, and varying the inter-letter spacing (but with interesting problems with Arabic and Devanagari where most characters should be kept ligated, by changing the length of the horizontal ligating stroke), or adjustment of margins, usage of borders around paragraphs, and distinct shading of backgrounds. When I look at most Asian web pages, Bold and Italic or other typographic effects used to emphasize some text is often rendered by using distinct colors or gray scales. It's interesting to see the colorful patchwork commonly found in Asian web pages, even the most serious ones that consist mostly of annotated text... Also, the Outline and Shadow styles are much more often used in Asian compositions than with Latin, notably for titling. And the range of point sizes used on the same page is much more important in Asian pages than in Latin/Cyrillic/Greek/Hebrew) pages. So any attempt to force mapping a italic or bold style on any text seems disastrous. It seems more intelligent to try mapping some conceptual styles like emphasized or quoted or footnote within stylesheets where actual fonts can be selected according to a language context. But this goes far beyond what Unicode can do (stylesheets are better studied by the W3C style/CSS working groups).
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
I hate to disagree, but... At 11:41 2003-06-21 +0930 Saturday, Kevin Brown wrote: Jain, Pankaj (MED, TCS) wrote: I am generating the PDF using XSLFO/FOP and Arial Unicode MS font for Global languages.And during Implementation I found that Bold/Italics character are not appearing in bold/Italic in PDF which was coming there is any Issue with Arial Unicode Font for Bold/Italic or I need to make some other configuration to fix it. Unlike the standard Arial family, Arial Unicode MS only comes with a single weight (regular) and style (roman). You can create synthetic (or faux) weights and styles using your application's style buttons and these will work perfectly well on screen and even with some printers (mainly inkjet). But these faux weights and styles will hardly ever work in desktop postscript printers, and never in pdfs or imagesetters. I just tested the use of boldface and italics with Arial Unicode MS and got different results than those asserted by Kevin (see above). I created a small Word document in which I wrote several words in Arial Unicode MS, some in normal (no bold, no italics), some in boldface, some in italics, and some in boldface italics. I created a PDF file that clearly showed heavier weight for the boldface and clearly showed slanted text for the italics (and both heavier and slanted for boldface italics). I then printed both the original Word file and the PDF file onto an HP 4100 PostScript printer and am able to see on the hardcopy those exact same results. I thus conclude that the use of absolute words like never is risky at best, and that some applications are capable of using Arial Unicode MS in boldface and italics by forcing heavier lines and by slanting the lines. Hope this helps, Jim Jim Melton --- Editor of ISO/IEC 9075-* (SQL) Phone: +1.801.942.0144 Oracle CorporationOracle Email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 1930 Viscounti Drive Standards email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sandy, UT 84093-1063 Personal email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] USAFax : +1.801.942.3345 = Facts are facts. However, any opinions expressed are the opinions = = only of myself and may or may not reflect the opinions of anybody = = else with whom I may or may not have discussed the issues at hand. =
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
Richard Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In later times, even with computerized font faces, it's my impression that italics and bold are not quite suitable for formal writing. Italics are extremely rare in the Chinese academic articles and books I use, whether published on the mainland, Taiwan, or Hong Kong, Rather than italics, if aesthetic effect is desired a cursive-style font is used, and for marking titles, brackets (U+300A/B or U+FE3D/E) or a wavy line (U+FE4F or U+FE34) is used. Generally speaking, italicization violates the fundamentally square nature of the Chinese character. Bold can be seen in larger headings in such formal writing, however, particularly in newer publications. But just as common, I would say, is the use of differently-sized fonts instead of bold type, not just for headings, but to set off notes, block quotations, etc. Allen - Original Message - From: Richard Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Kenneth Whistler [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Richard Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 20, 2003 4:45 PM Subject: Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF On Friday, June 20, 2003, at 02:44 , Kenneth Whistler wrote: What is true is that use of italicized text is unusual in Chinese or Japanese body text--certainly not with the frequency or same range of functions as occurs in Latin typography. Bold text is not that unusual, however. In precomputer Chinese, it would be very unusual to see italics or bold. The place of both is filled with point size differences, brackets/quotes of various styles, underlining (straight or saw-toothed, single or double). In later times, even with computerized font faces, it's my impression that italics and bold are not quite suitable for formal writing. Of course, in pop e-print, nearly everything that can be done to a character is done ... including Bold-Ital-Outline-Shadow ...
RE: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
Edward, thanks for the response. Is it possible to integrate glyph for bold and italic in arialuni.ttf or can I have one font which support all the languages and also have related glyph for bold and italic. Bold and italic need to be separate font files, and these do not exist for Arial Unicode MS -- and I wouldn't count on such appearing any time soon. - Peter --- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
- Original Message - From: Jain, Pankaj (MED, TCS) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: 'Edward H Trager' [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 6:37 PM Subject: RE: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF Edward, thanks for the response. Is it possible to integrate glyph for bold and italic in arialuni.ttf or can I have one font which support all the languages and also have related glyph for bold and italic. Thanks Pankaj There is no bold, italic or bold-italic font that matches Arial Unicode glyph for glyph ( Other pan-Unicode fonts don't have matching bold and italic versions either). For Latin script use plain Arial bold or Arial italic. In Windows, if you specify bold with Arial Unicode the Windows font rasterizer will generally try to imitate bold artificially - but this often looks pretty bad. Windows will also try to imitate italic by slanting the font. - Chris
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
At 22:29 +0200 2003-06-20, Philippe Verdy wrote: I think that Italic is to avoid for most Asian scripts, as readers are not used to it. For Arabic it may cause problems because of the placement of diacritic points. It sounds as though you are guessing. -- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
At 17:03 -0400 2003-06-20, John Cowan wrote: Michael Everson scripsit: I think that Italic is to avoid for most Asian scripts, as readers are not used to it. For Arabic it may cause problems because of the placement of diacritic points. It sounds as though you are guessing. Well, I certainly am, but it sounds quite plausible to me that having a mechanically slanted face for either Han or Arabic would not be sensible. Roozbeh informs me that oblique [Naskh] is a standard things nowadays, specially since it can usually be done automatically in software. Both slanted and backslanted. Certainly I saw italic signage in Kabul. And it doesn't take much manga to know that italics are certainly used with Han characters. Diacritics are placed in Latin and Greek text and we are satisfied to italicize them. My statement stands. -- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
Philippe Verdy, But it's true that complex scripts like Han will be poorly rendered in Bold or Italic... But does someone actually wants to read Han text with Bold characters (or even worse slanted with Italic) ? What is true is that use of italicized text is unusual in Chinese or Japanese body text--certainly not with the frequency or same range of functions as occurs in Latin typography. Bold text is not that unusual, however. Han (and Japanese kana) font designers have adapted a whole range of Western typographic ideas on top of traditional stylistic ideas for East Asian fonts, and it is not at all strange to find many ranges of bold/heaviness in fonts for display type, advertising, notices, and such, as well as different kinds of oblique or italic faces as well. You even see inverse-obliqued faces for vertical display, where the vertical lines of the characters stay vertical, but the horizontal lines are obliqued up to the left, to give the visual effect of angled text while maintaining vertical alignment. Just browse in any modern Chinese or Japanese magazine to see a great range of such effects. There are etter choice than Italic for Han: use a different font style, This is generally true. One wouldn't want to deal with glyphs in a Han font which are just algorithmically italicized in the renderer. Those would, indeed, generally be both ugly and hard to read. I think that Italic is to avoid for most Asian scripts, as readers are not used to it. For body text, in documents or on web pages, I would agree. --Ken
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
On Sat, 2003-06-21 at 02:04, Michael Everson wrote: Roozbeh informs me that oblique [Naskh] is a standard things nowadays, specially since it can usually be done automatically in software. Both slanted and backslanted. Certainly I saw italic signage in Kabul. Just to confirm. BTW, one of my concerns in writing automatic typesetting software, is what you do if you want to emphasize a paragraph containing both Arabic and Latin: The preferred angle for slanting Arabic is toward left, while the preferred angle for Latin is toward right. So, if you want your paragraph to look both consistent and nice, you should slant the whole text (including the Latin) to left if the main text is in Arabic. Now, assume how bad it will look to a Latin reader... roozbeh
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
At 14:44 -0700 2003-06-20, Kenneth Whistler wrote: I think that Italic is to avoid for most Asian scripts, as readers are not used to it. For body text, in documents or on web pages, I would agree. A wide range of oblique styles have been used in many Indian scripts for a very long time now. Generally they are used as display type, in headlines, for instance. -- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
On Friday, June 20, 2003, at 02:44 , Kenneth Whistler wrote: What is true is that use of italicized text is unusual in Chinese or Japanese body text--certainly not with the frequency or same range of functions as occurs in Latin typography. Bold text is not that unusual, however. In precomputer Chinese, it would be very unusual to see italics or bold. The place of both is filled with point size differences, brackets/quotes of various styles, underlining (straight or saw-toothed, single or double). In later times, even with computerized font faces, it's my impression that italics and bold are not quite suitable for formal writing. Of course, in pop e-print, nearly everything that can be done to a character is done ... including Bold-Ital-Outline-Shadow ...
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
At 16:45 -0700 2003-06-20, Richard Cook wrote: Of course, in pop e-print, nearly everything that can be done to a character is done ... including Bold-Ital-Outline-Shadow ... Hey, there's no reason only Latin typography should be filled with vulgarism... -- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
Philippe Verdy wrote on 06/20/2003 03:29:17 PM: I think that Italic is to avoid for most Asian scripts, as readers are not used to it. For Arabic it may cause problems because of the placement of diacritic points. Thai type designers are extremely creative and not afraid of doing with Thai type most anything that gets done with Latin type, as well as some things that I have not seen done with Latin type. Bold and italic? No prob. - Peter --- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
Jain, Pankaj (MED, TCS) wrote: I am generating the PDF using XSLFO/FOP and Arial Unicode MS font for Global languages.And during Implementation I found that Bold/Italics character are not appearing in bold/Italic in PDF which was coming there is any Issue with Arial Unicode Font for Bold/Italic or I need to make some other configuration to fix it. Unlike the standard Arial family, Arial Unicode MS only comes with a single weight (regular) and style (roman). You can create synthetic (or faux) weights and styles using your application's style buttons and these will work perfectly well on screen and even with some printers (mainly inkjet). But these faux weights and styles will hardly ever work in desktop postscript printers, and never in pdfs or imagesetters. Kevin
Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
Hi All, I am generating the PDF using XSLFO/FOP and Arial Unicode MS font for Global languages.And during Implementation I found that Bold/Italics character are not appearingin bold/Italic in PDF which was coming properlyperfect with other font like courier. Please let me know if there is any Issue with Arial Unicode Font for Bold/Italic or I need to make some other configuration to fix it. The font configuration setup is: font metrics-file="ARIALUNI.xml" embed-file="c:\WINNT\fonts\ARIALUNI.ttf" kerning="yes" font-triplet name="ArialUnicodeMS" style="normal" weight="normal"/ font-triplet name="ArialUnicodeMS" style="normal" weight="bold"/ font-triplet name="ArialUnicodeMS" style="italic" weight="normal"/ font-triplet name="ArialUnicodeMS" style="italic" weight="bold"//font Thanks Pankaj
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
Jain, Pankaj (MED, TCS) wrote: I am generating the PDF using XSLFO/FOP and Arial Unicode MS font for Global languages.And during Implementation I found that Bold/Italics character are not appearing in bold/Italic in PDF which was coming properly perfect with other font like courier. Please let me know if there is any Issue with Arial Unicode Font for Bold/Italic or I need to make some other configuration to fix it. Arial Unicode MS only supports oblique, not italics, right? Stefan
Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
To my knowledge, MS Arial Unicode does not contain glyphs for bold and italic styles. For Latin and the other blocks of Unicode covered in the standard Arial font, there are bold and italic versions: arial.ttf- Standard arial arialbd.ttf - bold arialbi.ttf - bold italic ariali.ttf - italic arialuni.ttf - Arial unicode, which only has a normal face. On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Jain, Pankaj (MED, TCS) wrote: Hi All, I am generating the PDF using XSLFO/FOP and Arial Unicode MS font for Global languages.And during Implementation I found that Bold/Italics character are not appearing in bold/Italic in PDF which was coming properly perfect with other font like courier. Please let me know if there is any Issue with Arial Unicode Font for Bold/Italic or I need to make some other configuration to fix it. The font configuration setup is: font metrics-file=ARIALUNI.xml embed-file=c:\WINNT\fonts\ARIALUNI.ttf kerning=yes font-triplet name=ArialUnicodeMS style=normal weight=normal/ font-triplet name=ArialUnicodeMS style=normal weight=bold/ font-triplet name=ArialUnicodeMS style=italic weight=normal/ font-triplet name=ArialUnicodeMS style=italic weight=bold/ /font Thanks Pankaj
RE: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF
Edward, thanks for the response. Is it possible to integrate glyph for bold and italic in arialuni.ttf or can I have one font which support all the languages and also have related glyph for bold and italic. Thanks Pankaj -Original Message- From: Edward H Trager [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 12:23 PM To: Jain, Pankaj (MED, TCS) Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Problem with Arial Unicode MS font for BOLD/ITALICS in PDF To my knowledge, MS Arial Unicode does not contain glyphs for bold and italic styles. For Latin and the other blocks of Unicode covered in the standard Arial font, there are bold and italic versions: arial.ttf- Standard arial arialbd.ttf - bold arialbi.ttf - bold italic ariali.ttf - italic arialuni.ttf - Arial unicode, which only has a normal face. On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Jain, Pankaj (MED, TCS) wrote: Hi All, I am generating the PDF using XSLFO/FOP and Arial Unicode MS font for Global languages.And during Implementation I found that Bold/Italics character are not appearing in bold/Italic in PDF which was coming properly perfect with other font like courier. Please let me know if there is any Issue with Arial Unicode Font for Bold/Italic or I need to make some other configuration to fix it. The font configuration setup is: font metrics-file=ARIALUNI.xml embed-file=c:\WINNT\fonts\ARIALUNI.ttf kerning=yes font-triplet name=ArialUnicodeMS style=normal weight=normal/ font-triplet name=ArialUnicodeMS style=normal weight=bold/ font-triplet name=ArialUnicodeMS style=italic weight=normal/ font-triplet name=ArialUnicodeMS style=italic weight=bold/ /font Thanks Pankaj
