Weird.
My Windows version of Linux Libertine G is version 5.1.3. I'm not yet deft
enough with Ubuntu to even know where fonts are stored on the system, but I
think it's the same version. Either way, I don't think it would explain why
LibO and AOO are producing different results with the same font.
I've spent enough of my afternoon looking at this issue, so don't bother
sending me your font files. This wasn't my problem to begin with. I just got
interested in it because of my fondness for the Libertine fonts.
For me, though, the real issue is that it underscores small (but important)
differences between LibO and AOO, which might be resolved if the respective
developers could get past their licensing issues and work together.
Virgil
-----Original Message-----
From: webmaster-Kracked_P_P
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 5:21 PM
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Searchable PDFs from Graphite fonts
Why would 3.6.2.2 [for 64-bit Ubuntu] give you the problem when 3.5.7.2
[for 64-bit Ubuntu] does not give the same issue to me.
That is a real head-scratching problem for me.
I downloaded my versions of the fonts in June of 2011. If you want, I
can upload the Linux Libertine fonts files I use to a place where you
can download then and check them.
As I said, my Ubuntu 3.5.7 version of LO is not showing me the issue you
are showing with 3.6.2.2.
On 10/31/2012 04:34 PM, VA wrote:
Okay, I just tested it with LibreOffice 3.6.2.2 for 64-bit Ubuntu (the
version I got when I just clicked on "Download" at the LibO website) and
got identical results. I used both Document Viewer and Okular to view the
PDF file. In both cases, the search function found "This" with the "Th"
ligature, but not "official" with the "ffi" ligature. Cutting and pasting
the text from the PDF file to GEdit also produced the rogue additional "h"
before each "i".
I then ran the same test with Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1 for Ubuntu and all
was fine, just as it was on my Win7 setup.
My next test will be to download the latest version of LibO for Windows
and try it again there.
I'm also wondering if the version of Linux Libertine G matters. Even if it
does, it is clear that, at least on my computer, Apache OpenOffice is
rendering it properly in a PDF file and LibO is not. Since I'm not a
developer, I have no idea why.
I agree that Apache and Libre have different licensing structures, but as
an end-user, not a developer, I don't particularly care. Both AOO and LibO
are free to use by users for any purpose without restriction. As a user, I
view the differences in the programs in terms of what they do for me, not
in how they are licensed.
Right now, on my computer, AOO works better with the Libertine G fonts,
but LibO has accurate US-English hyphenation.
So, my solution, which I hate, is to keep both programs on my computer and
load the one that meets my particular need at a given time. When I need
good Libertine G support, I use AOO; if I need good hyphenation, I load
LibO. I refuse to get sucked into licensing battles between two very
similar programs. I just want to get my work done.
Virgil
On 10/31/2012 02:27 PM, webmaster-Kracked_P_P wrote:
I tested it with 3.5.7 for 64-bit Ubuntu [.deb] and I do not see the
issue at all. I use the default PDF viewer as well.
I wonder if it was fixed between 3.5.6 and 3.5.7?
OR - Could it look different in a different viewer that the "official"
Adobe Reader?
I do have both the Linux Libertine G and the non-G versions. I used the
uploaded text file and tested it. The PDF output with "Export to PDF"
did not give me any issue.
As for the "best of both packages", in some articles I have read, AOO is
taking the "best" of LO coding and including it into their package, since
LO developer really have made a large amount of work cleaning and
improving the base code from the OOo 3.x base code days. The big
problem, IMO, is the licensing issue. AOO has a different approach, so I
have been told, and it is not as "flexible" for the rights of the
individual developers as the LO project has. AOO can use LO's code, but
LO's licensing approach will not allow AOO coding to be "easily" a part
LO's package unless there is a revamping of the way the developers keep
their ownership of their work. [or so I have been told in my reading].
As for the Libertine font itself, I see the following in my font window:
Linux Libertine
Linux Libertine Capitals
Linux Libertine Display
Linux Libertine Display Capitals
Linux Libertine G
Linux Libertine Initials
Linux Libertine Slanted.
I also have:
Linux Biolinum
Linux Biolinum Captials
Linux Biolinum G
Linux Biolinum Keyboard
Linux Biolinum Outline
Linux Biolinum Shadow
Linux Biolinum Slanted
I do not use Libertine or Biolinum "much", since about 1/3 of the things
I do I tend to go to others for editing in the Windows and non-LO
environment. They use the MS core fonts. Now if I was to send out in
PDFs, then I can embed the fonts in the documents and therefore could use
these fonts. With over 14 Gigi of font files to choose from, I tend to
get lost in who has and who do not have the fonts I use on a weekly
basis.
On 10/31/2012 01:39 PM, VA wrote:
Interesting problem. Based on my tests, which I detail below, it appears
to be LibO bug rather than a font problem.
I'm using LibO 3.5.6.2 with Win7 and Adobe Reader.
In the sentence "This is the official version" with Linux Libertine G,
there are two instances of automatic ligatures--the "Th" combination in
"This," and the "ffi" combination in "official." In Adobe Reader, I aas
able to find "This" when I did a search, which means that the Reader
recognized the "Th" ligature as a "T" followed by an "h" which is what I
typed into the search box. But, when I tried to search for "official"
the Adobe Reader couldn't find it, which means it did NOT associate my
typing of an "f", "f", "I" with the "ffi" ligature.
Then when I copied and pasted the sentence from the PDF file into a
plain text editor, it placed an "h" before every instance of an "i" just
as was reported. However, this obviously has nothing to do with
ligatures as most of the instances of "i" were NOT included in the
ligatures. In fact, it did not place an "h" before the "i" in the "ffi"
ligature.
For comparison, I ran the same test using Apache OpenOffice 3.4.1. to
see if it is a font issue or a program issue. I'm sorry to report that
it appears to be a program issue. In AOO, I typed the same sentence
using Linux Libertine G, "This is the official version." I then saved it
as a PDF and opened it in Adobe Reader. This time, a search found both
"This" and "official" despite both words containing ligatures. And, when
I copied the sentence into a plain text editor, it copied correctly
without any additions of "h" before "i".
I love the Linux Libertine set of fonts. I use it, not only with LibO
and AOO, but also when I set a document in LaTeX.
I have found that Apache OpenOffice's support for Linux Libertine G
appears to be more complete and polished than LibO's. This may be an
example of that more complete support.
Of course, LibO has its advantages over AOO; for example, it properly
hyphenates American English words, with AOO does not appear to do. It
would be nice if someone could combine the best of both programs into
one complete program (along with the tabbed interface of Lotus Symphony,
yet a third fork of the original OO). But, I won't hold my breath.
Virgil
-----Original Message----- From: Dan Lewis
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2012 7:02 AM
To: users@global.libreoffice.org
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Searchable PDFs from Graphite fonts
On 10/30/2012 11:08 PM, Jonathan Schultz wrote:
I can select the text in the PDF, copy and paste, but get an 'h'
added before most 'i'. I can search, but not if the word is one with
the extra h before i Steve
That's exactly what I mean. It effectively means no searching.
I tried both Linux Libertine and Linux Biolinum [14 point] on my
3.5.7 version for Ubuntu 64-bit. I cannot replicate the issue with
"added" characters.
Were you using Graphite fonts ('Libertine G'/'Biolinum G')? Those are
the ones where the problem arises. Those are also the fonts that do
ligatures and other lovely typesetting things that make them look so
nice, which I why I want to use them.
Cheers,
Jonathan
Seems to me that you have solved your own problem: it is the
fonts. The search function can not handle the the lovely typesetting
things. As you mentioned, an "i" looks like a "hi" to it. The only real
solution is to not use any of the Graphite fonts in a PDF.
But if you want to search the PDF, have you opened it in Draw and
search for the text in it?
--Dan
--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems?
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
deleted
--
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
