On 19/12/17 15:15, Hans Hagen wrote:> On 12/19/2017 12:56 AM, Reinhard Kotucha wrote:
Markus, I'm glad that you asked. I'm convinced that Type 1 fonts can be converted to CFF on the fly reliably and that many people enjoy the smaller PDF files. I don't see any technical restrictions. We just need volunteers.
Honestly, I don't care about an already large pdf being a few hundred k larger ... not in these days of 100 MB flac and 2 GB mp4 files, not to speak of crappy pictures being megapixels. On my machine the pdf's are not the large files.
I maintain archives of thousands of PDFs (departmental technical reports, student project dissertations, PhD theses, etc.). Many of these files contain exactly the same font information, and for many of these documents, the embedded Type 1 fonts dominate the file size. Not exactly elegant. Another point in favour of CFF is that Adobe donated in 2013 to the FreeType project their high-quality Adobe CFF Engine hinter. That only parses the CFF format, not Type 1. Therefore, you may get today on many platforms (Android phones, tables, etc. all seem to use FreeType) better hinting if the fonts are CFF encoded, rather than Type 1. https://blog.typekit.com/2013/06/19/adobe-cff-font-rasterizer-accepted-by-fr... https://opensource.googleblog.com/2013/06/youve-got-cff.html https://opensource.googleblog.com/2013/05/got-cff.html https://sourceforge.net/projects/freetype/files/freetype2/2.4.12/ I guess, the first step towards encouraging better Type 1C font support in the TeX ecosystem would be to get CFF/Type 1C versions of e.g. the BaKoMa font files onto CTAN. (I'd prefer the font files to be distributed and loaded in CFF, rather than having them converted on the fly from an anachronistic and uselessly encrypted format each time. In other words: best eradicate Type 1 at the start of the processing pipeline.) Markus -- Markus Kuhn, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~mgk25/ || CB3 0FD, Great Britain