Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!haven!mimsy!mojo!disney!josip From: josip@ra.src.umd.edu (Josip Loncaric) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hardware Subject: Re: Using HP Lasers with Mac? Message-ID: <1990Sep20.133051.15899@ra.src.umd.edu> Date: 20 Sep 90 13:30:51 GMT References: <1990Sep19.095632.2860@csc.anu.oz.au> <1990Sep19.141200.12661@ra.src.umd.edu> <1990Sep20.035832.24900@rodan.acs.syr.edu> Sender: news@ra.src.umd.edu (The News System) Organization: Systems Research Center, University of Maryland, College Park Lines: 54 In article <1990Sep20.035832.24900@rodan.acs.syr.edu> wwtaroli@rodan.acs.syr.edu (Bill Taroli) writes: >In article <1990Sep19.141200.12661@ra.src.umd.edu> josip@ra.src.umd.edu (Josip Loncaric) writes: >> >>There is also a font limitation which dates back to the original Macintosh: >>bitmapped fonts can be at most 127 pixels high (in my experience). This is >>only about 30 pts when printed... so you cannot use large bitmapped fonts... >>use ATM or wait for TrueType... in summary, QuickDraw-based printer drivers >>have all of the limitations of QuickDraw... > >This issue of the limitations of QuickDraw font sizes is sort of amusing. True, >most applications around still limit us to 127 point text. However, exactly >what imaging model do you think ATM is using when it generates at 127x4 font >for printing on a DeskWriter (which uses QuickDraw -> Agfa to set up its >pages)???? No, this is a limitation of applications, not QuickDraw. (However, >if applications wish to remain compatible with older systems, then the imposed >limitation makes sense for them, at least.) Well, check my statement above: I am talking about BITMAPPED fonts, not Adobe outline font technology. Bitmapped fonts are curently the only Apple-supported QuickDraw glyph imaging technology. If you check Inside Macintosh Vol. I, the 127 pixel limitation for FONT resources is clearly mentioned. Apple has tried to extend this to 255 pixels in Mac II (see IM page V-185), but in my personal experience, Mac II QuickDraw chokes on anything over 127 pixels high. If you dig a bit deeper, you'll find that QD Font Manager communicates via records which pack glyph height info into byte-wide fields. This means that Apple COULD fix QD to allow handling bitmapped fonts of up to 255 pixels, however, they HAVE NOT DONE IT RIGHT yet. So, until further notice, if you rely on QuickDraw to render glyphs, you'll have trouble with anything taller than 127 pixels. I've reported this as a problem to Apple, since I want to display math equations which incorporate parenthesies and integral signs taller than 127 pixels (i.e. about 30pt when printed). So far I've had no reply short of assurances that they will look into this. By the way, the same limitation applies to all QuickDraw-based printers AND screen display operations. So, if you do not have ATM fonts, you are out of luck on this one. While an application CAN override the QD bottleneck StdText and do its own glyph rendering, this is silly. Are we going ot have each developer coming up with his/her own glyph rendering technology? IMHO, Apple should take the lead here, not just by developing TrueType, but also by allowing a reasonable BITMAPPED alternative... For my personal use, I'd consider a 255-pixel limit more reasonable than the 127-pixel limit. A final comment: all of the above applies to QuickDraw printing or display operations only. The problem is not there when you print to a PostScript printer. And yes, I am using the latest system (6.0.5) on a Mac II... -- Josip Loncaric / SRC / U. of Maryland / -------------------------------------------------------------- ! Today's Special: Opinions....$0.02 each ! --------------------------------------------------------------