Dear Werner, On Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Werner LEMBERG wrote:
It seems the changes from Adobe Symbol ver 001.001, apparently used to make symbolsl.afm, to the latest Symbol ver 001.008 you have sent me are minor (as afmdiff.awk from ghostscript shows). Thus the ancient black magick done by James Clark (jjc at yquem) may be left as it is.Anyway, it would be good to know how this has been done...
I guess that printafm program, now bundled with ghostscript, was used.
It prints afm for a Type 1 font.
It was written ... by James Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>.
Thus I have ferreted out of the Net the oldest version of Adobe Symbol
(001.007, attached), instructed my ghostscript to use it for Symbol and
symbolsl.pfa, by adding to Fontmap
/Symbol-Slanted (symbolsl.pfa) ;
/Symbol (symbol7.pfb) ;
When I have run
printafm Symbol-Slanted > symbolsl7.afm
the resulting file had only minor differences with symbolsl.afm
from groff. That changes may be attributed to changes in Adobe Symbol font
(ver 001.001 vs. 001.007) and (may be) PS implementation used.
Thus the magick stick used to make Symbol-Slanted seems to be found.
But the problem of the unknown reasons behind changes done by symbol.sed
remains. Can you contact James directly?
Sincerely, Michail
SSsolution.tgz
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ Groff mailing list Groff@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
