Re: PCL font spacing [SOLVED]

[David Gerdt <Dg...@bju.edu>]

When the problem first occurred, I tried a couple different fonts with the same results, which lead me to believe it was a Java problem. I eventually ran a test against every font available by default and the results were all over the board. Of the 35 fonts available to me, only two supported every variant I wanted to use (bold, italic, bold-italic, underline), and neither one of them were a suitable typeface for the document.
 
After running in circles for a while, I found that setting the JAVA_FONTS environment variable allowed me to pull new TTF files and use them. I was able to find a font that worked and am in good shape.
 
Should have caught on to this earlier, but thanks for the help/advice.
 
Dave

>>> Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> 6/16/2008 12:34 PM >>>
Looking again at your FO: you don't specify a font, so you operate on
the default font. Have you tried using a different font? And have you
played with the "text-rendering" setting?
http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/0.95/output.html#pcl-configuration 
Just to see if anything changes.

I can't think of other work-arounds that can help you. Normally,
negative spaces are possible but I don't think we support spaces/margins on
the inline-level, yet.

On 16.06.2008 18:20:51 David Gerdt wrote:
> I just tried Java 6....same results. *sigh*
>  
> I'm pretty tied to rendering PCL directly without some intermediary
> process both due to speed concerns and the fact that I need to use the
> tray selection extension on this particular report.
>  
> Maybe I will just have to replace this section with an image....or is
> there any way to incorporate negative margins? Absolute positioning
> maybe? None of those sound particularly enjoyable, but....
>  
>  
> 
> >>> Jeremias Maerki <de...@jeremias-maerki.ch> 6/16/2008 11:24 AM >>>
> No. The only option I see for you is that you generate PDF or PostScript
> and convert it to PCL using GhostScript if you cannot use PostScript in
> the first place. No chance that you can upgrade to a JDK 5 or 6? I can
> see that IBM provides that for AIX:
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/jdk/aix/service.html 
> 
> On 16.06.2008 15:32:11 David Gerdt wrote:
> > I ran the test again using the most recent build (ca142-20080515 (SR11)) with the same results. : (
> >  
> > Is there a way to circumvent this by setting up fonts manually?
> > 
> > >>> "Andreas Delmelle" <an...@telenet.be> 6/13/2008 12:12 PM >>>
> > >----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
> > >Van: David Gerdt [mailto:Dgerdt@bju.edu] 
> > >Verzonden: vrijdag, juni 13, 2008 05:30 PM
> > >
> > >I made the change to fo:wrapper and the problem does persist.
> > 
> > OK, thanks for checking! (Even if it doesn't solve your problem, the advice is still valid: if possible, use fo:wrapper instead of fo:inline. Maybe we'd better add that hint to the website... I'll look into that.)
> > 
> > In the meantime, I've also been looking at the related code, and it indeed looks JVM-related. IIC, then the issue applies to all Java2D-based renderers. The most likely cause is that one (or more) of the Java AWT font-related classes return(s) different values for the same method call(s) on AIX and Windows. (PDF and PS would not exhibit this difference, since they don't rely on Java AWT for the font-metrics; using standard Java-APIs has its benefits, but clearly also its drawbacks...)
> > 
> > Is the JVM that is used on AIX the most recent available build for version 1.4.2 (if I read correctly, it's a build from 1.5-2 years ago)? If not, can you try upgrading to the latest build, and see if that helps?
> > 
> > 
> > Andreas
> > 
> > 




Jeremias Maerki


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: fop-users-unsubscribe@xmlgraphics.apache.org 
For additional commands, e-mail: fop-users-help@xmlgraphics.apache.org