[OS X TeX] gtamacfonts ligatures: PDF searchability
will.adams at frycomm.com
Tue Mar 28 15:21:15 EST 2006
On Mar 28, 2006, at 3:07 PM, Gilles Pérez-Lambert wrote:
> Er, I don't understand something here. You say "for use in and within
> Mac OS X" and that TeX is not bundled with OS X. So, if a program is
> not installed by OS X, it should not use the fonts. Or, to be more
> precise if I understand you in the thread, it a program does not use
> OS X's way of reading fonts... I do not agree at all. TeX (not
> restricted to XeTeX) *is* using OS X.
The fonts are there to be used w/in Mac OS X, using API calls ---
XeTeX is an example of how one can do this w/o converting the fonts.
> What is controversial is the Apple Licence which says not to copy or
> decompile the sofware (therefore fonts). Is reading a dfont
> decompiling or even copying? I'd like one day to have official words
> from Apple. Dfont is just a way to wrap ttf data, no more, no less. I
> tried to follow all the historical threads of these list archives but
> I may have not found Apple words on that specific matter.
I've posted the relevant bits of Apple's license here in the past ---
I'd suggest reviewing it w/ a lawyer if you don't believe me.
Do you have some other explanation of why Windows/PC and OS/2 tables
are removed from more recent versions of Apple fonts than that Apple
wants people to abide by the font license?
> By the way, I found quite strange to ask someone to pay twice for a
> font one already paid with the system. It's not "unfair" use. I know
> fonts are to be paid (and I pay for them) but I don't want to pay
> twice for them just to have them packaged (pfa, pfb, ttf, otf...)
Try that argument w/ a bookstore after you've purchased the hard-
cover and want a paperback copy to take w/ you to read when
travelling (I doubt Amazon would replace my water-damaged copies of
_Digital Typography_ or _TeX Unbound_ or _Elements of Typographic
Style_ either), or w/ a software vendor which makes separate Mac and
Windows versions (or Linux) of a program and _chooses_ to license
them separately. Turn it around --- Adobe never offered me any sort
of up-grade offer for the copy of Adobe Garamond and Expert Set I
bought back in 1989.
If Jonathan Hoefler, (or Linotype) wanted to license Type 1 versions
of their fonts freely to people who've purchased Mac OS X, the could
if they so choose --- they don't however, and it's wrong to take that
choice away from them.
Linotype at least very graciously offers an up-grade (including _two_
different versions, one specifically for Mac OS X compatibility) of
Zapfino, so I think it's reprehensible to not accept such.
senior graphic designer
This email message and any files transmitted with it contain information
which is confidential and intended only for the addressee(s). If you are
not the intended recipient(s), any usage, dissemination, disclosure, or
action taken in reliance on it is prohibited. The reliability of this
method of communication cannot be guaranteed. Email can be intercepted,
corrupted, delayed, incompletely transmitted, virus-laden, or otherwise
affected during transmission. Reasonable steps have been taken to reduce
the risk of viruses, but we cannot accept liability for damage sustained
as a result of this message. If you have received this message in error,
please immediately delete it and all copies of it and notify the sender.
------------------------- Info --------------------------
Mac-TeX Website: http://www.esm.psu.edu/mac-tex/
& FAQ: http://latex.yauh.de/faq/
TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
List Archive: http://tug.org/pipermail/macostex-archives/
More information about the MacOSX-TeX