Re: [ft-devel] what old/new FontVal says about these fonts

[Werner LEMBERG]

A happy new year to all of you!


> I am down to 1 file difference - 14.ttf. The hmtx table is
> missing/mis-spelt alright.  That does not seem to stop the FontVal
> 1.0 backend loading the glyf and check rasterization/hinting.  I
> tried by-passing that check in freetype - it seems that it is
> possible to cope from incremental loading?  but I did not get ftdump
> to run. fails with 0002 - unknown file format?

I've finally decided to not support outline TTFs that are missing the
`hmtx' table.  Theoretically it would be possible to extract the
advance width (both unscaled and hinted) from the two horizontal
phantom points, but this would need a major coding effort, I guess,
and it's not worth the labour for broken fonts.

> Also, I wrote 'fully' - type face 0 in 24.ttc seems to be mostly
> intact . That may be why some other viewer can use it. Any chance of
> making that work a little better?

There was actually a bug: For TTCs, FreeType inspected face index N+1
while requesting named instance information for index N.  A side
effect was that FreeType tested face index 1 to check whether the TTC
is valid.

Fixed now.  FreeType now tests face index 0 – this makes font 24.ttc
work.

A further improvement to handle broken fonts would be to loop over all
TTC header entries to find valid subfonts (cf. `sbit_strike_map' in
`sfnt_load_face' that eliminates invalid strike entries), but I'm too
lazy to do that.  Volunteers welcomed!


    Werner