This is the mail archive of the
xsl-list@mulberrytech.com
mailing list .
Re: XSL:FO and Unicode Fonts
- From: "Joerg Heinicke" <joerg dot heinicke at gmx dot de>
- To: <xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2002 18:33:26 +0100
- Subject: Re: [xsl] XSL:FO and Unicode Fonts
- References: <5.1.0.14.0.20020109171246.00a28ec0@pop3.leegoddard.com>
- Reply-to: xsl-list at lists dot mulberrytech dot com
> Is it impolite to ask a XSL:FO question here?
> If so, could you please suggest a more aprt forum?
It's ok. The list is about XSL, i.e. XSLT + XSL:FO.
> And...is it impolite to ask about Unicode font support?
> If not, how are people handling rendering of high UTF-8
> characters on a WIndows platform, as BOLD and ITALIC
> and BOLD ITALIC?
It's not the first question according Unicode ;-)
> I'm using the standard ArialUnicodeMS font, but it doesn't
> support Bold and Italic (according to Apache FOP), so when
> I do <xsl:fo wrapper font-family="ArialUnicodeMS" font-style="italic">,
> I get a 'no such font' error.
I don't understand the real problem, maybe it's really a font problem. But
why don't youe use "normal" Arial and change the encoding of your XSL:FO
from UTF-8 to (for example) ISO-8859-1?
> Does anyone know of a freeware Type I or TTF font Unicode font
> with all glyphs present?
>
> Or -- has anyone written a stylesheet to manipulate the fonts to create
> a bold or italic effect? (The former sounds likely, the latter
impossible,
> but I am just guessing.)
>
> Thanks in anticipation of any pointers
> lee
Regards,
Joerg
XSL-List info and archive: http://www.mulberrytech.com/xsl/xsl-list