VMs: Font info

["GC" <glenclaston@xxxxxxxxx>]

Hello all,

Couldn't sleep, so thought I'd pass along some info for those
interested.  I've been doing some research into the different
levels of font embedding, as it directly affects the portability
and functionality of any given font.  Assuming that fonts are
intended to be used for expression and communication,
functionality is something that must be considered with the
several modes of eBook and eAuthoring currently available to the
student.

Fonts have four main portability attribute settings, as listed
below.  Each directly affects the functionality and usefulness of
the font.


There are four main settings for font files.

1.  The restricted license - Allows for no imbedding at all in any
Microsoft, MacIntosh, RTF or Adobe compatible document.  The
equivalent of a display font.  This font has no portability, and
must be installed on the local system in order to view any
document containing its description.  Should the font become
corrupt or be removed from the local system, any document using
that font would display in the system default font, usually
Courier or Arial.

2.  Print and preview - embedding in documents that are read-only.
Font does not install on system.  Used primarily by commercial
typesetting companies, mostly for headline fonts and fonts not
intended for wide distribution.

3.  Editable embedding - font embeds in document, and document can
be edited, but font does not install on system. Of the 1,000 or so
fonts on my system, only a handful are set at this level, and none
are commercially manufactured.  These are privately authored fonts
where the creator was probably using an older program and didn't
understand the importance of the different levels of access.  When
this level is set, the font is usually missing copyright,
description and contact information as well.

4.  Installable embedding - this is the one I've tested the most.
When someone opens a word.doc with the font embedded, the font
automatically installs on their system.  This is not an option
suitable for all occasions, but it certainly saves the trouble of
trying to explain to someone how to install a font, and provides
the font with the widest level of functionality and dissemination.
This is the most common level of embedding access, and the most
portable and functional level available.

The major drawback with the installable level is that if your
document contains a revised version of the font, the old font will
not automatically be overwritten on the local system.  It must
first be removed manually.  Then the new font will install
automatically once the updated document is opened.

The highest level of copy restriction deemed necessary by
commercial font foundries is editable embedding, with Microsoft
and Adobe types primarily set at installable embedding.  Given our
context of usage, editable embedding is reasonable for a
progressive font, and installable embedding is suitable for
finished fonts that are not subject to revision and want to enjoy
a wide distribution.

The older system of distributing fonts with separate copyright
files is no longer necessary, as free tools exist that allow
copyright information, web links and contact information to be
installed directly into the font file itself, even into older font
files.  Microsoft's Font Properties Editor is one of those tools,
available on their website.  Microsoft also has tools available
that will analyze your font and provide a list of creation errors.
Anyone who has created their font with Fontographer absolutely
needs this tool, and expect the list of errors to be quite long.
Fixing these errors reduces file size and improves screen and
print imaging at the same time.

Anyone who is interested in creating fonts should be aware that
the ever-popular Fontographer has not been updated since 1996,
while font technology has changed drastically in the last six
years.  They're still charging $350 for the outdated program, but
cheaper programs exist that are both current and better featured,
starting at around $100.  Don't get hood-winked.

Those wishing or intending to electronically author a paper on
something as odd and intricate as the Voynich desire that the
reader view their document as it was written, and not as the
reader's local system interprets it.  The author must also
consider file size, and would not wish to paste hundreds of
graphics of Voynich characters into that document when the same
could most economically be accomplished using a scalable embedded
font, at a file expense of about 40kb for a clean and tidy font.
The equivalent I've discovered, of less than 20 pasted graphic
characters, far less than any estimated character usage to date.
This has something to do with the fact that electronic formats
handle graphics separate from text, so even a very small graphic
is assigned a block larger than the actual graphic within the
document itself, wasting valuable space.  This is true of the two
most popular document display platforms, Adobe Acrobat Reader and
Microsoft Word Reader.

Many of us have things to communicate about the Voynich that
require the reader to see the document as it was intended, but few
of us have the time to labor over image cut-and-pastes, or to deal
with the current limitations of older web browsers,
incompatability issues and people who simply refuse (at great
expense to others) to update their technology, no matter how free
those updates cost them personally.

I'm very close to releasing the first part of my transcription for
discussion purposes, and along with that I will be releasing the
first version of the associated font, probably as an editable
embedding font at this point, so as not to widely distribute an
incomplete version of the font.  Most of the characters in the
present version have been carefully traced from actual images, but
a few remain for me to work on as time permits.

What primarily remains before the initial release is my in-depth
reasoning on glyph identification, and the problems associated
with any attempt, a document that naturally requires a portable
font.  I will put forth few conclusions on the meaning of these
glyph-sets, other than to draw attention to their conception,
construction, variances and possible equivalences. With your
insights I hope to be able to complete a transcription that allows
for graphic display of all variances and oddities in one
glyph-based transcription.

GC

To the religious, good and evil are total opposites - to the
atheist they are two different sides of the same coin - to the
human secularist, they are two different sides of the same face.