You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> on 2012/03/28 19:20:17 UTC
CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
On 3/28/12 5:31 AM, "olegsivokon@gmail.com" <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes Martin, I understood the legal problem. I was just wondering what is
> particular about the code that it cannot be replaced by other (modified)
> font managers. As you probably know, there are 4 managers currently in SDK
> which can encode fonts using somewhat different techniques, but only one
> can encode them in a way they fit for the use with the FTE classes. This
> is, I assume, the one Alex is talking about. So my question was rather:
>
> what if we take on of the existing managers and modify it so it will
> generate DefineFont4 tags - how much of an effort will it require? Or maybe
> the technology itself is patented (I doubt this very much... but you never
> know)?
>
I'm still trying to make sure I understand both the technical and legal
issues. I see specs for CFF and DefineFont4, but there are rumors that the
conversion is currently done via proprietary algorithms. If we (Apache
Flex) just write our own, there may be a quality issue.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 4/4/12 9:30 AM, "Martin Heidegger" <mh...@leichtgewicht.at> wrote:
> As I search about implementing fonts in haXe i stumbled upon this [1]. I
> have to say hxswfml is easier to read than the fontforge source.
An update: Adobe is still investigating what it would take to make a set of
JARs available to Apache.
The fontswf utility is only available in the full Adobe Flex SDK. Someone
would have to have an Adobe license then could create SWFs with fonts in
them that can be embedded into Apache Flex SWFs.
I've been told that DefineFont4 is really just a blog of CFF data, so any
utility that can convert other fonts to CFF has a chance of working.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
Posted by Martin Heidegger <mh...@leichtgewicht.at>.
As I search about implementing fonts in haXe i stumbled upon this [1]. I
have to say hxswfml is easier to read than the fontforge source.
yours
Martin.
[1] http://code.google.com/p/hxswfml/source/detail?spec=svn118&r=117
<http://code.google.com/p/hxswfml/source/detail?spec=svn118&r=117>
On 30/03/2012 09:37, Dave Fisher wrote:
> On Mar 28, 2012, at 6:05 PM, Left Right wrote:
>
>> Aha... so, as far as I could understand, CFF is different from TTF in that
>> it uses cubic curves for outlines instead of quadratic. Is there anything
>> else that is different?
>> Would this also mean that fonts, originally in OTF (CFF) format can be
>> compiled right away w/o needing to do some [more] complex math to translate
>> outlines fairly? If so, that could be a start, well, at least for people
>> who use CFF for the features built on top of it rather then for it's own
>> qualities (*sigh* which is another interesting paradox of how originally
>> good idea turned into disaster...) could continue using it to some extent.
>> It's also strange that the format exists for almost 10 years, and
>> is standardized under ISO and no opensource libraries exist for using /
>> converting it? Sounds fishy, I'd say...
> FontForge might be a possibility. [1]
>
> It is only offered in source now. I've got to hold onto my old MacOS/X11 version. It uses a revised BSD license which could be checked if the project is interested.
>
> It claims to support CFF. [2]
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
> [1] http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/
> [2] http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/TrueOpenTables.html
>
>
>
>> Best.
>>
>> Oleg
>
>
Re: CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
On Mar 28, 2012, at 6:05 PM, Left Right wrote:
> Aha... so, as far as I could understand, CFF is different from TTF in that
> it uses cubic curves for outlines instead of quadratic. Is there anything
> else that is different?
> Would this also mean that fonts, originally in OTF (CFF) format can be
> compiled right away w/o needing to do some [more] complex math to translate
> outlines fairly? If so, that could be a start, well, at least for people
> who use CFF for the features built on top of it rather then for it's own
> qualities (*sigh* which is another interesting paradox of how originally
> good idea turned into disaster...) could continue using it to some extent.
> It's also strange that the format exists for almost 10 years, and
> is standardized under ISO and no opensource libraries exist for using /
> converting it? Sounds fishy, I'd say...
FontForge might be a possibility. [1]
It is only offered in source now. I've got to hold onto my old MacOS/X11 version. It uses a revised BSD license which could be checked if the project is interested.
It claims to support CFF. [2]
Regards,
Dave
[1] http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/
[2] http://fontforge.sourceforge.net/TrueOpenTables.html
>
> Best.
>
> Oleg
Re: CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
Posted by Left Right <ol...@gmail.com>.
Aha... so, as far as I could understand, CFF is different from TTF in that
it uses cubic curves for outlines instead of quadratic. Is there anything
else that is different?
Would this also mean that fonts, originally in OTF (CFF) format can be
compiled right away w/o needing to do some [more] complex math to translate
outlines fairly? If so, that could be a start, well, at least for people
who use CFF for the features built on top of it rather then for it's own
qualities (*sigh* which is another interesting paradox of how originally
good idea turned into disaster...) could continue using it to some extent.
It's also strange that the format exists for almost 10 years, and
is standardized under ISO and no opensource libraries exist for using /
converting it? Sounds fishy, I'd say...
Best.
Oleg
Re: CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
Posted by Martin Heidegger <mh...@leichtgewicht.at>.
On 29/03/2012 02:20, Alex Harui wrote:
> I'm still trying to make sure I understand both the technical and legal
> issues. I see specs for CFF and DefineFont4, but there are rumors that the
> conversion is currently done via proprietary algorithms. If we (Apache
> Flex) just write our own, there may be a quality issue.
Converting <any-font-format> to <otf> is not properly defined, as far as
I know. Also: the various
font formats have different capabilities and not all cases are 100%
clear. That means that any
algorithm will work slightly different. Additionally: If Adobe
"improved" the algorithms to a
a non-straight conversion but flash focused conversion then that's
hidden knowledge (nowhere
documented etc.). I do not see the effort to try to reverse engineer the
algorithm as appropriate.
May the new version be Apache Flexy.
yours
Martin.
Re: CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 3/28/12 11:00 AM, "Om" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I hope the solution we come up with will work for Falcon as well.
>>
>>
> We == Adobe?
>
We == Apache Flex
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
Posted by Om <bi...@gmail.com>.
> I hope the solution we come up with will work for Falcon as well.
>
>
We == Adobe?
I am wondering if there is anything at all that Apache Flex can do in terms
of solving this problem.
Re: CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com>.
On 3/28/12 10:41 AM, "Om" <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Does Falcon come with support for CFF Fonts?
> When it is open-sourced, will
> it be gimped in the same way when it comes to fonts?
I hope the solution we come up with will work for Falcon as well.
--
Alex Harui
Flex SDK Team
Adobe Systems, Inc.
http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
Re: CFF Font Embedding (was Re: Here Comes MXMLC!)
Posted by Om <bi...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 10:20 AM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> On 3/28/12 5:31 AM, "olegsivokon@gmail.com" <ol...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Yes Martin, I understood the legal problem. I was just wondering what is
> > particular about the code that it cannot be replaced by other (modified)
> > font managers. As you probably know, there are 4 managers currently in
> SDK
> > which can encode fonts using somewhat different techniques, but only one
> > can encode them in a way they fit for the use with the FTE classes. This
> > is, I assume, the one Alex is talking about. So my question was rather:
> >
> > what if we take on of the existing managers and modify it so it will
> > generate DefineFont4 tags - how much of an effort will it require? Or
> maybe
> > the technology itself is patented (I doubt this very much... but you
> never
> > know)?
> >
> I'm still trying to make sure I understand both the technical and legal
> issues. I see specs for CFF and DefineFont4, but there are rumors that the
> conversion is currently done via proprietary algorithms. If we (Apache
> Flex) just write our own, there may be a quality issue.
>
>
Does Falcon come with support for CFF Fonts? When it is open-sourced, will
it be gimped in the same way when it comes to fonts?