🚀 go-pugleaf

Felix Gatzemeier writes

> So the only difference is representation? That's something I wanted
> to know for a long time, my problem being that my NeXT doesn't eat
> Mac-Fonts directly.

>   There are converters in the public domain that convert macintosh
>   to NeXT fonts. They should be avoided, because any conversion
>   will influence the font esthetics. Instead, you should wait for
>   the font suppliers to publish special NeXT fonts.

There are "conversions" and there are "conversions".  If you take
a Type 1 font program in Macintosh format and turn it into a Type
1 font program in Unix format (aka NeXT), all you've one is tweak
formatting information, and expanded the binary encoding into hex
- none of the actual "font program" had been touched.

However, if you use a font utility that does program "conversion"
(from TrueType to Type 1, for example) what the utility is usually
doing is reading in the font program, getting the character
coordinates for every character, and writing out a completely new
font program in the new type program format.  This often loses all
hinting information, which is what the desktop publishing magazine
was warning about.


Please be aware that Adobe's Type 1 font programs are copyrighted
software, and must be treated according to the licence agrement on
the package.  When the font is converted from one format to another
(Mac to Unix) it is still a derivative work and still falls under
that licence agreement.  Type 1 font program format conversion
utilities make it easy to forget that you are still using the same
Type 1 font program, just in a different representation.

--
Scott Byer                             NeXTMail: byer@mv.us.adobe.com
Adobe Systems Incorporated               These are *my* opinions, and  
1585 Charleston Road, P.O. Box 7900        do not necessarily reflect
Mountain View, CA 94039-7900             the opinions of my employer.
---------------------------------------------------------------------