Ken Sharp <ken.sh...@artifex.com> writes: > At 00:31 19/09/2017 +0900, Masamichi Hosoda wrote: > >>When you create a PDF document using something like a TeX system >>you may include many small PDF files in the main PDF file. >>It is common for each of the small PDF files to use the same fonts. >> >>If the small PDF files contain embedded full font sets, >>the TeX system includes all of them in the main PDF. >>The main PDF contains duplicates of the same full sets of fonts. >>Therefore, `PDFDontUseFontObjectNum` can remove the duplicates. >>This may considerably reduce the main PDF-file's size. > > And if you have multiple subsets, badly named (eg OpenOffice output) > then you get a final PDF file where some of the text is missing or > garbled.
So? Nobody forces anybody to use that option. >>LilyPond has option `--bigpdfs` for unifying duplicate fonts in this >>method. > > And your point is what ? That we are talking about functionality that is considered useful? > That's not what the pdfwrite device is intended for, and we don't > claim you can use it to do that. > > As I said, if you think its that useful, then you can add the switch > back in. In fact, provided you don't change SubsetFonts, the resulting > file may well be smaller anyway, since the pdfwrite device will only > embed that portion of each font (which you say is a complete > duplicate) so the resulting two fonts will be smaller than the > original two fonts. > > Risking incorrect output for the minimal benefit of a slightly smaller > file seems unwise to me. I think "slightly smaller" was something like a factor of 10. We are talking about files including literally thousands if not ten thousands of graphics (manuals close to a thousand pages with lots of graphic output included). -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ lilypond-devel mailing list lilypond-devel@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-devel
