Re: [wpmac] Re: BasiliskII-based WPMac system
PrintToPdf worked when adobe and laserwriter 8 were causing a version of
SheepShaver to crash with the then version of OSX. The current
SheepShaver print routine works fine, so printtopdf is there as a back
up. It's also useful if, like me, you need a pdf so that you know all
the footnote cross references for wen the WP file is saved as Word
because that is what the publisher insists on - much easier to work with
the pdf and the Word file to make sure Word has all the right footnote
Professor of Law
Editor-in-Chief, International Journal of Refugee Law
Head of the School of Law
School of Law and Human Rights Centre
University of Essex
Tel: +44 (0)1206 872557
Fax: +44 (0)1206 873428
Email: geoff (for those outside the University, add @ followed by
> John R <mailto:johnrethorst@...>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> 1 June 2013 23:17
> My package includes SmoothType, a nice control panel that smooths
> better than Apple's Appearance.
> I looked at PrintToPDF some time ago, and concluded that the
> restricted number of fonts it supports was a substantial limitation --
> of course, not if it supports fonts you use. But is it much faster
> than the Laserwriter 8 driver plus opening in Preview?
> It's also interesting that PrintToPDF doesn't embed fonts. I don't
> understand that part of things -- Laserwriter 8 gives you the option
> of embedding fonts. When I re-released my Scripting Guide in PDF
> format, I embedded fonts, thinking formatting would then be accurate
> and not dependent on the user's fonts. But I was told the Guide opened
> up as gibberish on some machines. Ed suggested not embedding fonts, so
> I replaced it with a PDF file without embedded fonts and have had no
> complaints. I would have thought things would go exactly the other way.
> Are there other advantages to PrintToPDF relative to Laserwriter 8?
> John R.
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> Geoff Gilbert <mailto:geoff@...>
> 27 May 2013 15:29
> Not certain if these are now included in the start up pack, but I know
> I used them before you incorporated (if you already have) -
> SmoothType, Dialog View and PrintToPdf. The latter two are Jim
> Walker's and I think are free. DialogView is the most useful.
> Apologies if these are standard already - and 12 seconds is very
> impressive in the days of OSX Bloat
- On Sat Jun 1, 2013 3:17 pm ((PDT)), "John R" <johnrethorst@...> wrote:
>It's also interesting that PrintToPDF doesn't embed fonts. I don'tThe PDF spec defines 8? standard fonts that are supposed to be on
>understand that part of things -- Laserwriter 8 gives you the option
>of embedding fonts.
every system (in the old days, often installed with Acrobat Reader),
so if you used only those fonts, you could be guaranteed that your
appearance and layout would be preserved without needing to embed
fonts. Also, those PDFs were smaller, since instead of embedding the
font, they just used a reference (tagging the text runs with the font
name, or something similar). And in the pre-Mac OS X era, PrintToPDF
was a simple and inexpensive way for the average
(non-Acrobat/Distiller-owning) Mac user to produce PDFs. (It also
supported making "structured PDFs" (headings to PDF Table of
Contents, links, etc.) from programs like WP that didn't specifically
output things in the way Distiller required for structured PDFs; I
kept using PrintToPDF for that even after I owned Acrobat.)
>When I re-released my Scripting Guide in PDF format, I embeddedIt's definitely been a while since I've done that, but about a decade
>fonts, thinking formatting would then be accurate and not dependent
>on the user's fonts. But I was told the Guide opened up as gibberish
>on some machines. Ed suggested not embedding fonts, so I replaced it
>with a PDF file without embedded fonts and have had no complaints. I
>would have thought things would go exactly the other way.
ago I used to embed the fonts that all the time, with no problems in
the subsequently-generated PDFs. I also don't remember your
Scripting Guide situation, but it's possible there was some sort of
encoding/charset issue with the font used (this is typically the case
with, e.g. gibberish PDFs produced by random software on Linux,
although I haven't seen this problem in some time even with that).
I'm not sure that this provides any solutions, but perhaps there's
some useful background as to the whys.