OpenType & Type 1 names

[_Nigel_Hamilton_]

I read a comment by Thomas Phinney that it was a "Bad Idea to create a new font with the same names info as an existing font in a different format." What if you are going to replace a Type 1 font with OpenType, is that still a "Bad Idea" and why?

Nigel

[_Txortx_]

Hi Nigel,

I suppose, as you can see in the new Adobe Fonts (they haved added the Std suffix to all the fonts), that everyone would prefer to tell which font is the t1 and the OT. But if the font you are using is by yours and you want a complete replacement i suppose that you should use the same name to avoid problems everytime you open a document and the application complains due to the fact that it doesnt find the font used in that doc.

Jordi

[Thomas Phinney]

That's right.

Basically, Adobe couldn't guarantee that there would be 100% perfect compatibility with the old Type 1 versions - especially with added symbol characters that formerly got Symbol substitution on the Mac, for instance. So we gave them new names to avoid confusion and let people use the old fonts side-by-side with the new ones.

But if you're doing something purely for internal use, and you are controlling the whole environment and the differences between the fonts, then you could give the new fonts the same name as the old one. Just remember that you'll be taking your chances apps or system components that make assumptions about the fonts based on the names being the same....

Regards,

T

[_Nigel_Hamilton_]

Thomas

I understand Adobe's position re 100% compatibility which was probably compounded in that the Adobe OpenType fonts were released over a period of time.

But realistically how many users access the symbol characters in the Type 1 fonts? And; if Adobe had released all the OpenType versions at once wouldn't it have been better for the users if the names were kept the same rather than doing a search and replace?

Nigel

[Thomas Phinney]

It really had nothing to do with the period of time the fonts were released over. After all, even if they were all available at once wouldn't mean that users would buy them all at once. Also, the symbol characters were just an additional complication; even without them we couldn't guarantee there would not be reflow. So we made the decision that we were going to have to rename the fonts. It was a tough call, and debated heavily at the time.

Keep in mind also that if the names are the same, there are compatibility problems going in the other direction. You do a nice document in InDesign using small caps and oldstyle figures in the OpenType version of Glurbish Modern. Then you pass it on to your colleague who is using the old Type 1 version. Because the extra goodies are in separate fonts in that version, your small caps turn into lower case, your oldstyle figures turn into lining figures, and by the way, that euro symbol you used disappears entirely when she opens the document. Oh, and if she's on Windows, she doesn't have Symbol substitution, so any of those characters also disappear - even though maybe you were on Windows as well. It's not just a matter of the metrics changing and getting reflow.

Anyway, after we made that decision, we were free to enhance the fonts even further. So we did a bunch of things, from adding not only the euro but also the litre and estimated symbols (not present in the Type 1 versions), to enhancing the kerning of the accented characters (which was very lacking in some of the oldest Type 1 designs).

Regards,

T

[_Christoph_Herold_]

Well, this discussion is maybe a bit off-topic but interesting.

There's another issue with the names. Having OTF fonts installed instead of T1 versions, the name changes perturbs most applications. And as automatical font substitution doesn't work that well under Win XP, it's a pain. Especially opening PDFs without embedded fonts. But the same thing happens when you open for instance an old Word or PageMaker file you once set in a T1 variant of the font. You'll have to do lots of search and replace work. And Panose doesn't do a very good job either. Thus, the new names cause a lot of headaches.

The only solution is then to waste lots of disk space and install both versions (if I have them). BTW, I do it anyway for dingbats fonts, as only InDesign is really Unicode-savy.

Regards,

Christoph

[_Nigel_Hamilton_]

The majority of the Adobe Type Library is over 8 years old so why is it necessary to create perfect compatibility? Most software has been updated numerous times in 8 years.

Linotype modified its Adobe fonts and added the Euro character and documents containing "non Euro" Adobe fonts and "Linotype modified Euro fonts" handle the addition of the Euro character fine.

Re your comment about the "other direction" regarding small caps I think most people use the full character set SC OsF fonts and not the "Expert" fonts so you would just need to turn on the small caps feature to restore the document. But this brings up another issue since Adobe stopped making Type 1 fonts since 1999, are there that many people still purchasing "old" Adobe Type 1 fonts rather than OpenType?

If you have a large Corporate Identity and you want to update to OpenType fonts what is the difference between:
1) To deal with possible reflow or
2) To deal with a font name change and reflow

Thomas you are a valuable ambassador for OpenType and your comments on this and other forums is greatly appreciated. When do you think Type 1 fonts will be in the past and OpenType will reign?

You also mentioned that another "major" application will be supporting OpenType, any further developments?

Regards

Nigel

[Thomas Phinney]

In terms of Adobe's current sales, OpenType already reigns supreme. But then again, our Web site is set up so you have to go to extra trouble to even find the Type 1 stuff.

In terms of sales of fonts worldwide, I think it will be another year or two before OpenType is the majority, and maybe 3-5 years before it's an overwhelming majority.

In terms of the installed base of font users, I can easily imagine that taking 5-10 years. The old Type 1 fonts work fine for now, so why change them?

Regards,

T

[D_Zurn]

I have been sorely tempted to update my company's custom fonts to OpenType from Type 1 format. However Thomas had an excellent point, that not all our *vendors* might be updated at the same time. So they might have our old Type 1 font loaded and open a doc with my new bling-bling OpenType font. They won't get any Font Missing error since the old Type 1 is taking up that niche in our font ecology.

So I am resigned to renaming the font, and the users will do a font substitution if they want to use the OpenType version.