Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!execu!sequoia!rpp386!woody From: woody@rpp386.cactus.org (Woodrow Baker) Newsgroups: comp.lang.postscript Subject: Re: Using a postscript printer for previewing? Summary: Well, here we are Message-ID: <17466@rpp386.cactus.org> Date: 19 Dec 89 22:16:51 GMT References: <28@macuni.mqcc.mq.oz> <1637@intercon.com> Organization: River Parishes Programming, Plano, TX Lines: 69 In article <1637@intercon.com>, amanda@mermaid.intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes: > Urrrkh. Woody, you're starting to sound like Don :-). > > What's the big secret? Anyone with a modicum of intelligence who looks at > an unencrypted Adobe font can figure out what the purpose of most of it is. > With all of Don's emphasis on "pixel locking" and so on, I'm surprised he > hasn't written an article about FlxProc and shown how it actually works, > and how such techniques can be useful in general in PostScript programming, > rather than just saying "look at what I found." Look, I respect him as an > engineer and a writer. I've got several of his books on the shelf next to > my desk, for example, and I think his "Incredible Secret Money Machine" is > one of the best books on being a technology entrepreneur that has ever been > written. I also think his columns talking about alternative binding methods > and printing materials are very well done and are a distinct service to the > on-demand publishing community. > > However, when he starts talking about PostScript itself, he seems to go > off into left field (sort of like the the Monty Python skit where the > guy puts a bag over his head whenever someone says "matress" :-)). After > reading his columns for several years I still haven't figured out what > axe he's trying to grind against Adobe, beyond "they didn't want me to > take it apart," which sounds a little childish even from a hacker from way > back. > > Sigh. > > Maybe I just don't have enough sense of the mysteriousness of PostScript, > but all of the things that Don takes so much glee in "revealing" seem > quite straightforward to me, such as: > > - Deglitching Bezier contours in device space (FlxProc) > - Rounding overall font parameters in device space (BlueValues et al.) > - Compensating for characteristics of the marking engine (Erosion functions > and parameters) > - Factoring out common features such as serifs, bows, and so on (Subrs) > - Encoding glyph contours and composite characters in as compact a format as > possible (Subrs and CharStrings) > - Fulfilling license agreements with typeface manufacturers to prevent > people from easily obtaining outline representations of characters > (encrypted fonts and the infamous charpath "lockout" on pathforall). > > These aren't evil, secret things, folks... These are things that *should* > be in an sophisticated page imaging system. The main reason that I'm waiting > with bated breath for the Type 1 font format description isn't so that I > can peek at Adobe fonts, or because it's a "secret finally seeing the light > of day," but because it will give me the tool I need to build fonts that > are both "hinted" and compact, at the same time. One thing I do get irritated > about is reinventing wheels :-)... > > If I want to satisfy my hackerish impulses, I can think of a lot more rewarding > things to take apart than my laser printer's intepreter... > > Grumble. > > Amanda Walker > InterCon Systems Corporation > -- A most enlightening post. I quite agree, that some of Dons's things are off the wall. I STILL haven't figured out what is so hot about "rubbergridding" However, most of these things that you feel are simple, are, but they were dug out with much effort. It wasn't until fairly recently, that the encryption scheme was craked. You seem to have all of the information on hand dealing with the hinted, compacted fonts. You seem to have some that I've been lacking and given that, I could long ago have created goodlooking, hinted fonts. Get with it. Cheers Woody Baker