Re: "Standard Symbols"

Subject: Re: "Standard Symbols"
From: Martin Sevior (
Date: Mon Jun 19 2000 - 19:29:47 CDT

On Mon, 19 Jun 2000, Shaw Terwilliger wrote:

> Sure, X can be tricked into using a different name a few different ways.
> In our unixfonts package, we include a "fonts.dir" which contains both the
> true names for the font files we package as well as a few aliases ("Times
> New Roman", etc.). Many of these names are not the proper font names for
> files they map to, but are more obvious to new users. Giving them familiar
> names also provides a more accurate mapping between documents done on
> Windows and Unix.

I suggest we go one step further and change the name "Standard Symbols" to
"symbol". Having "Standard Symbols" will just cause problems when people
pass documents generated on Unix to Windows. Having an extra alias
"symbol" would solve importing Windows documents to Unix but not vice
versa. This is not something a Church Secretary needs to worry about.

This requires a bit of extra code to convert font names "Standard Symbol"
to Symbol. Unless someone says no I will do this.

> I guess the right way to do this mapping would be to create a "fonts.alias"
> in the unixfonts package, with mappings for these newly proposed aliases.
> I just put the aliases in "fonts.dir" while I was deciding on the names and
> styles to support, and I would recommend sticking any more aliases in
> "fonts.dir" now (unless someone wants to change all the installers to
> install a "fonts.alias"). Just copy the four lines (normal, bold, italic,
> bold italic) and change the name field. Don't forget to update the count
> at the top by four.

Thanks for the clues Shaw. This helps a lot.



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Mon Jun 19 2000 - 19:29:59 CDT