R. Robert Bell
Design Technology Manager
S P A R L I N G
Opinions expressed are mine alone and do not reflect the views of Sparling.
Thanks for the reply, Robert. I hadn't thought of complex linetypes, but you're right. However, I remember Autodesk springing on us the plotting changes in, what was it 2000 or 2000i, and the drawing format change in 2004. Then there was the changes to customization with the CUI editor in 2006.
These all represented big changes to the user experience. I would hope they warn us before making any changes to the shx fonts. But who knows? Guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Moving to ttf has some significant advantages when you start dealing with data transfer to other formats. One simple, but quite common example, it is possible to plot ttf to pdf, and have text, which can then be edited downstream. This simply isn't possible with shx which isn't really a font, it's just shapes that look like letters (as far as all other programs are concerned)
The real irony is that Autodesk hints that they are on the verge of finally completely embracing a technology that would improve interoperability with the whole of the graphics and publishing world (ttf), at the same time that the graphics and publishing world are moving away from it, and on to the next better thing (otf).
Still, I hope that AutoDesk will resolve the performance issues with ttf, to make it a viable option, and then provide ttf versions of all the fonts that were once only available as Leave shx available, for linetypes, etc., and support it as a font for legacy drawings, but stop shipping it. People will migrate their files over the next few releases.
When that happens, someone is going to make a small chunk of change from good ttf versions of archquik, and archstyl, and other common shx fonts that have never shipped with AutoCAD. And, somewhere along the way, someone is going to make a big stink about the fact that fonts are intellectual property - strictly speaking you can't just email them to other firms without first gettiing the OK from the owner of the copyright.
2008 AUGI Top DAUG
Thanks for your reply; you've added another layer of clarity to the possiblility of this happening. I guess I'm not opposed to the move to ttf, just a bit surprised by the possiblity. The performance issues are my greatest concern, since I deal with large data sets and/or larger drawing file sizes with many externally referenced files.
In any event, it seems we will just have to wait to see what Autodesk does, and then change our workflow/standards/comfort zones to fit.
I have been for some time know trying to figure out how to add unicode support to an Architectural style font that I have modified over the years. I have added a centerline symbol as well as several other characters but now I want to access them using standard unicode protocols. Any suggestions? Thanks.
Manuel A. Ayala