Re: PostScript fonts in MsOffice 2007
- From: "Tom Ferguson" <tom.newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 03:02:21 -0400
I would first contact Monotype Imaging or other good source to ask them which package would be best for the company's use. Probably, a package of Open Type fonts would serve best.
This is one possibility.
http://tinyurl.com/39n8zo
Be sure to tell them which operating system or systems and applications you intend to use it with.
After that discussion, you will better be able to offer the managers good advice.
Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007
"Dimitar Gyoshev" <dgg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:0D612E7E-0DCA-4255-B286-8D4952FF0851@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thank you Tom,
I will consult with the Managers to follow your advice for looking for Gil
Sans - OpenType . I am not a big font specialist, could you advice me with
stipulation of the request for improving the company font, Please!
I mean how to formulate them the request 'To buy Gill Sans Cyr Open Type or
Trough type ' or..... however is called ???!?? but not PostScript . Help me
please.
P.S. This historical explanation of the "bug" was funny!!
--
Dimitar Gyoshev
"Tom Ferguson" wrote:
I hope it works for you.
I am not sure that what you are seeing is a "bug" in the strict sense. As I
understand the term, a "bug" is a fault or flaw in the system that results
in improper operation. Historically, the original "bug" was literally that.
A moth had somehow gotten squashed between the electrical contacts of a
relay in an main-frame computer and cause a malfunction. Thus, there was a
"bug" that caused an error. The term stuck. In this case, I suspect the
system is operating as intended. However, there is at least one consequence
of that operation-as-designed of the font substitution system, it gives an
intended result, the font is substituted according to the rule set; however,
you see a failure to render the Cyrillic glyphs properly. So, technically,
there is not a "bug" but an unsuitable intended result.
But, in a sense, this is hair-splitting. The result is not what you need or
want.
I would suggest contacting Monotype and seek their advice on changing your
corporate font to one that has the look and feel you want and whose files
will work with Office 2007 and the operating system possibly an Open Type
Gill Sans.
All the best.
Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007
"Dimitar Gyoshev" <dgg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:3C25A536-33D1-4502-AD46-36333EA3FB93@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Tom,
>
> Thank you for the attention and advices.
> On this way to convert the fonts I will find solution ( probably),
> BUT ANY HOW THIS IS A BUG IN THE MsOffice 2007 as many others and the > hope
> that Ms will repare it is left!
>
> Wish you all the best and Merry Christmas!
>
> -- > Dimitar Gyoshev
>
>
> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>
>> One reply from my query was
>> "My guess is that there something about the font that doesn’t meet the
>> spec – could be code page or Unicode range bits not being properly >> set."
>>
>> On that issue, contact Monotype.
>>
>> Check FontLab website for a converter.
>> http://www.fontlab.com/
>>
>> Check your computer for any variety of Gill Sans in Truetype format. >> E.g.
>> some Microsoft products ship with one on the CD or DVD and will >> install
>> it.
>> That version does _not_ have Cyrillic glyphs and if it is being
>> substituted
>> for the MT PostScript font, you would get the result you experience.
>>
>> Tom
>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>>
>> "Dimitar Gyoshev" <dgg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:B0008063-571E-4938-9F9F-CEF03658A55C@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > Thank you Tom ,
>> >
>> > But I haven't TrueType version of Gill Sans Cyr MT font.
>> > Could you advice me with the name of the best software for convert >> > from
>> > Postscript to TrueType version ( if any is available),Please?
>> > -- >> > Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >
>> >
>> > "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "Tom Ferguson" <tom.newsgroups@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >> news:%23tkEYCiMIHA.1184@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> > Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType >> >> > version
>> >> > of
>> >> > Gill
>> >> > Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy >> >> > the
>> >> > TrueType version to a different folder in order to back up the >> >> > files
>> >> > and
>> >> > then delete the TrueType files
>> >>
>> >> +++from the font folder+++
>> >>
>> >> .. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem
>> >> > remains.
>> >> >
>> >> > Tom
>> >> > MSMVP 19989-2007
>> >> >
>> >> > "Dimitar Gyoshev" <dgg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >> > news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >> Gentlemen,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another
>> >> >> directory
>> >> >> too
>> >> >> far away from my question!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office >> >> >> 2007
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> usage
>> >> >> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
>> >> >> 1. This is our Company font !
>> >> >> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
>> >> >> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
>> >> >> 4. I will repeit the question again
>> >> >> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means >> >> >> no
>> >> >> problems)
>> >> >> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically
>> >> >> changes
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I >> >> >> mean) .
>> >> >> When
>> >> >> I
>> >> >> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request >> >> >> font
>> >> >> Gill
>> >> >> Sans
>> >> >> Cyr MT In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window -
>> >> >> nothing
>> >> >> happened
>> >> >> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' >> >> >> solve
>> >> >> my
>> >> >> problem
>> >> >> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT >> >> >> THE
>> >> >> BEST
>> >> >> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked >> >> >> perfectly!!! ,
>> >> >> now
>> >> >> with
>> >> >> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the >> >> >> same
>> >> >> installation) .
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS
>> >> >> fonts!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -- >> >> >> Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on
>> >> >>> cross-language
>> >> >>> support
>> >> >>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention.
>> >> >>> Indeed,
>> >> >>> in
>> >> >>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography >> >> >>> department,
>> >> >>> I
>> >> >>> have
>> >> >>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I >> >> >>> might
>> >> >>> have.
>> >> >>> And,
>> >> >>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like >> >> >>> yours
>> >> >>> and
>> >> >>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall >> >> >>> that
>> >> >>> the
>> >> >>> OP's
>> >> >>> issue had to do with language coverage.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Tom
>> >> >>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> "Character" <Char@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> >> >>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >> >>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data >> >> >>> >> has
>> >> >>> >> nothing
>> >> >>> >> to
>> >> >>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs
>> >> >>> >> present.
>> >> >>> >> Those
>> >> >>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is >> >> >>> >> no
>> >> >>> >> technical
>> >> >>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. >> >> >>> >> It
>> >> >>> >> is
>> >> >>> >> my
>> >> >>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by
>> >> >>> >> little
>> >> >>> >> more
>> >> >>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No
>> >> >>> >> doubt
>> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts >> >> >>> >> in
>> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >>> >> format.
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> Tom
>> >> >>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing
>> >> >>> > more
>> >> >>> > than
>> >> >>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as >> >> >>> > OT
>> >> >>> > instead of
>> >> >>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph >> >> >>> > set
>> >> >>> > than
>> >> >>> > T1
>> >> >>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat
>> >> >>> > limited
>> >> >>> > sample.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a
>> >> >>> > couple
>> >> >>> > of
>> >> >>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type >> >> >>> > features
>> >> >>> > of
>> >> >>> > anything available.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language
>> >> >>> > coverage,
>> >> >>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic
>> >> >>> > support,
>> >> >>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive
>> >> >>> > glyph
>> >> >>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > - Character
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>
.
- References:
- Re: PostScript fonts in MsOffice 2007
- From: Dimitar Gyoshev
- Re: PostScript fonts in MsOffice 2007
- Prev by Date: Re: PostScript fonts in MsOffice 2007
- Next by Date: Re: PostScript fonts in MsOffice 2007
- Previous by thread: Re: PostScript fonts in MsOffice 2007
- Next by thread: Re: PostScript fonts in MsOffice 2007
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
