|
| From: | Amigo Aleman |
| Subject: | Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx |
| Date: | Fri, 2 Jun 2017 19:16:08 +0200 |
I am a bit confused about the Adobe Source Han <-> Noto Fonts relationship. I think there is a good degree of co-operation, but Adobe and Google both have their own little ideas (not least branding and visibility) so the two fonts share a lot but not identical.
Some of this thread has gone into a bit of overly technical discussion (which you can ignore). Let me try to give a somewhat biased summary of the various alternatives of using custom fonts for Latex documents.
1. If you are doing new documents, and do not have a lot of baggages and opinion about how Latex *should* work, LuaTeX and XeTeX can both access arbitrary platform fonts. I have no experience with LuaTeX; I tried XeTeX, and found the change in layout, word-breaks, hyphenations unfamilar. Yes, I think even if you stick to Computer Modern Roman, you'll need to learn new ways of doing those things. However, if you are writing a new document in LaTeX and needs to do a lot of languages or a lot of different fonts, those are the ways to go for flexible handling of fonts, and other typographic features of non-English.
2. If you have a lot of baggages, i.e. extending an old LaTeX document with new paragraphs in a new language/fonts, besides setting up dvips, there are two other ways of targeting pdf. pdfTeX and dvipdfmx. So in 2003 I went in that direction, and wrote it up, in a file called
"cjk/doc/pdfhowto/HOWTO.txt" (it is part of the CJK documentation and it should be in your hard disk if you are using TexLive), which covers mostly dvipdfmx and a bit on pdfTeX also. More below.
2a. The main difference between going through postscript with dvips ->ps2pdf vs directly to pdf via pdfTeX/dvipdfmx is graphics. If you need psfrag or any of the latex packages which depends on running through ghostscript, then you have to use the former. However, the latter has a numbers of advantages: the pdf format itself suppports direct embedding of tif, png, gif, and also, pdf itself has an object model, so also a pdf page as graphics also, and with that transparent graphics as well. A traditional dvips workflow only supports eps as graphics, and involves converting all of these into such (and losing transparency in png, for example) either explicitly or behind the scene.
2b. There are a number of differences between pdfTeX and dvipdfmx - the former has a larger (more English-speaking) community, and the latter was/is run by a smaller number of Korean people. One of the explicit goals of the latter is preserving text-searchability. i.e. pdf's from dvipdfmx preserves encoding information, and you can extract non-english text, cut-and-paste from it (the same applies to the modern XeTeX/LuaTeX output also), have its content indexed by a Google's search engine, etc. Whereas non-English dvips/ps2pdf and pdfTeX generated pdf's loses encoding information and loses the full compatability of being indexed by a search-engine.
3. When I wrote "cjk/doc/pdfhowto/HOWTO.txt" in 2003 I mostly wrote for usage of typesetting localized text for localized proprietary fonts. Around 2013/2014 I revisited it (possibly because I had a new computer), most of it had stood the text of time and still useful in 2014, but it was still very much get-your-hand-dirty and developer-oriented. We discussed a number of upcoming changes in TeXLive then - many of the tools were being migrated away from FreeType 1 (which had not been updated for nearly 20 years) - which would have made life a lot easier; the changes in TeXLive seems to have completed since. Things have indeed gone easlier; It is due a re-write, so I guess I should update it.
4. So this little thread uncovers another interesting differences between the three: dvips needs postscript type 1 fonts; pdfTeX still cannot use the other font index in a ttc.
5. I'll like to make all of them work again, so I'll possibly try to get dvips and pdfTex to work also; personally I am leaning on dvipdfmx as it lets me use the font as is (sharing with platform-viewing) without going whole-sale the XeTeX/LuaTeX way.
--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 2/6/17, Thorsten <address@hidden> wrote:
Hello Werner, hello Hin-Tak,
I am a bit in a hurry leaving
for work, so only a few lines:
* "Noto Serif CJK is a rebadged version of
Source Han Serif" says https
://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noto_fonts , so they
should be the same I
thought?
* The Hanazono font is
japanese, as I try to write Chinese text, I
would rather like to stay with a Chinese font,
if possible. And if you
are right, my
problem seems to be not missing glyphs in the original
font, but some mistake in my installation
process?
* If I look to the
state of the discussion on the list, I feel like a
layman listening to a discussion of experts...
not understanding
much... ;-))) I only hope,
that in the end there will be a way I
understand...
* I am visiting my sister's 25th
anniversary of her wedding over the
weekend,
so I have to apologize, that I am not quite sure, in how far
I
manage to do further experiments or
respond to emails during this
time...
Thank you for all effort you
invest into my problem!
Thorsten
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |