Autohinting concerns [was: type1z vs. type1 charstrings processing.]

[Tom Kacvinsky]

My concern has to do with global hints.  Glyph hints can probably be
safely ignored, but global hints turn on/off overshhoot supression, in
addition to giving some information about standard stem widths.

In addition, I know a Type 1 font (no need to go to CID fonts to get
these) can also have counter control hints, but only if certain
key/value pairs are defined in the Private dictionary, and that the
hints which are counter controlled do not fall with the zones defined
by /BlueValues.  Which is a global hint structure.

I guess I will be reading the autohint white paper shortly and
perusing the charstrings parser/autohint code to make sure my concerns
are nullified.

Tom

On Sat, 1 Jul 2000, Werner LEMBERG wrote:

> 
> > The "type1z" hinter simply loads the glyphs, and it's _definitely_
> > faster with all the benchmarks I've tried.. Further, the "type1"
> > hinter is really crummy compared to the auto-hinter..
> 
> My knowledge of Type 1 hints is very minor...  Does the auto-hinter
> completely ignore hints?  This would be not optimal, I think.
> 
> 
>     Werner
>