Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!ub!mdeck
From: mdeck@acsu.buffalo.edu (Mary Deck)
Newsgroups: comp.text.tex
Subject: Re: Why not change METAFONT to produce pk fonts?
Message-ID: <47572@eerie.acsu.Buffalo.EDU>
Date: 26 Nov 90 18:31:20 GMT
References: <527@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca> <1990Nov25.194312.16829@wsrcc.com>
Sender: news@acsu.Buffalo.EDU
Organization: State University of New York at Buffalo/Comp Sci
Lines: 22
Nntp-Posting-Host: sybil.cs.buffalo.edu

In article <1990Nov25.194312.16829@wsrcc.com> gm@wsrcc.com (Greg McGary) writes:
>jtc@van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca (J.T. Conklin) writes:
>>Has anyone considered changing METAFONT's output font format from gf
>>to pk fonts?  What are the drawbacks of doing this?
>
>GF format contains "specials" in addition to the raster.  Specials are
>not included in the PK format, since only the raster is typically used
>by DVI drivers for document production.  So, PK is *not* a substitue for
>GF.  ...

Ok, then, how about having PK be the default output format, and having
a switch for GF format output?  Since PK format is used by almost
everything, I wouldn't think that this is too far fetched.  And when
one is building hundreds of fonts, it would (IMHO) save a lot of time
and make a lot of sense to create the correct format in one pass.

				.......Mary
---
Mary M. Deck
Student Assistant, User Services  |  Internet:  mdeck@cs.buffalo.edu 
University Computing Services     |  uucp:      rutgers!ub!mdeck
SUNY at Buffalo                   |  Bitnet:    mdeck%cs.buffalo.edu@ubvms