CSX fonts

[Daniel Baum]

Hi,

Apropos moving over to TeX, I have actually used nothing other than TeX to
write papers etc. with for years. However, it is not a very good file format
to actually store information in, since the source files look like
gobbledegook, and sometimes you need to do other things than just reading
your texts. Also, the Harvard Rigveda is in CSX coding, and I see no reason
to convert it to anything else, as it is very readable (as long as you solve
the font problems I have come up against) and TeX accepts CSX coded text
direct.

DB


-----Original Message-----
From: Anshuman Pandey <apandey at U.WASHINGTON.EDU>
To: INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK <INDOLOGY at LISTSERV.LIV.AC.UK>
Date: Saturday, February 28, 1998 7:41 AM
Subject: Re: CSX fonts


>On Fri, 27 Feb 1998, Daniel Baum wrote:
>
>> The solution in the end was to use the Washington Indic truetype font as
a
>> screen font, and then compile the document in TeX using the Washington
Indic
>> PK font. Surprisingly the two fonts are coded slightly differently; the
>> a-acute is in a different place. I simply programmed a macro in my text
>> editor to do a search and replace before I compile the TeX file, and
another
>> afterwards. I will definitely have a look at the alternative TeX fonts
you
>> suggested, although I've never used .vf fonts before; is there anything
I
>> should know before I start?
>
>The reason the TrueType font differs from the METAFONT is because certain
>character positions are rejected or reserved in Windows, so any character
>appearing in that position will appear empty. Tom Ridgeway, who made the
>WNRI TrueType and Postscript fonts, made copies of certain characters in
>duplicate positions to account for this behavior of Windows. These WNRI
>fonts really need to be revamped.
>
>Here's another suggestion: Move completely over to TeX and your problems
>will be solved! Ask anyone... :-P
>
>Regards,
>Anshuman Pandey
>