Dismiss
InnovationQ will be updated on Sunday, Oct. 22, from 10am ET - noon. You may experience brief service interruptions during that time.
Browse Prior Art Database

Typestyle Height Supported in RFT

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000100554D
Original Publication Date: 1990-May-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2005-Mar-15
Document File: 2 page(s) / 70K

Publishing Venue

IBM

Related People

Carter, KE: AUTHOR [+2]

Abstract

Typestyle height could not be explicitly interchanged in Revisable-Form Text (RFT) documents for typographic fonts.

This text was extracted from an ASCII text file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 52% of the total text.

Typestyle Height Supported in RFT

       Typestyle height could not be explicitly interchanged in
Revisable-Form Text (RFT) documents for typographic fonts.

      With the previous RFT architecture, font width was used to
implicitly define font height.  This assumed that all applications
which support RFT could determine a specific typestyle height (e.g.,
10 point) from a specific font width (e.g., 14 pitch) for a
typographic typestyle (e.g., Helvetica, upright, bold) supported
across all printers and fonts.  Since font width defines the width of
a space in a typestyle, the RFT architecture also assumed that
multiple typestyle heights for a typestyle would not have the same
font width.

      Investigation of Personal Computer (PC) printer fonts supported
by Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) and Postscript printers
proved these assumptions were not valid. Furthermore, many of these
printers support soft fonts which can be downloaded into the printer.
 The fact that these fonts may be designed by third party vendors and
not the printer manufacturers indicated further that the RFT
architecture could not standardize font width values across printer
fonts and soft fonts for a printer manufacturer. Finally, the
addition of all-points-addressable (APA) print fonts in DisplayWrite*
5/2 (DW5/2) (with font width definitions that differ from printer and
soft fonts) clearly indicated that the previous RFT architecture was
not capable of interchanging typestyle height correctly for
typographic fonts.  In conclusion, the lack of standard font
definitions (and therefore font width values) across all IBM, OEM,
and Postscript printers, as well as APA fonts supported by various
applicatio...