Myself: > Now I am trying to understand a very simple case: > for the latin1 device, no font definition contains > a glyph named [`A], while it is this glyph that > [char192] maps to (by latin1.tmac). And this works > correctly without any warning messages. Where does > groff take the definition for this glyph?
Yeah, I confused octal and hexadecimal numbers in the font files for devlatin1 and devhtml. The glyph is there and works as expected. Sorry. I tried adding a new line to ...\font\devutf8\r: u0410 24 0 0x411 deliberately incrementing the device code by one, and it did work! Why doesn't the same action (when tested with the same input file) work for ...\font\devhtml\r? What is the difference? And where are the glyph definitions taken from when not defined in the font file? Thanks in advance, Anton
