Re: psnfss and lw35nfss

[Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@elsevier.co.uk>]

 > On the other hand I'm rather worried about PostScript-specific info
 > getting into the VFs, since they're meant to work with arbitrary print
 > engines: TrueType, QuickDraw, ActiveZzzz, etc etc.  PSnfss is a bad
 > name which we're stuck with...
a bad concept even. i wish it would go away

but Bernard's dotlessj solution doesnt out any special stuff in the
vf file, which is why its the best solution i have seen so far. it
leaves it up to the driver to do the work

 > Problem is that the default TeX behaviour is to put a warning in the
 > log file but not on the screen, so if you use a missing glyph then you
 > get no visible warning---the only way to find it is to check the
it depends on the implementation, doesnt it? it seems to me a failing
in `normal' TeX systems that this isnt flagged as a fatal error

 > proofs by eye.  At least the black boxes produce a warning at the
 > dvi-processing level and produce a very visible `something's gone
 > wrong' indicator.
I lean both ways on this. Karl and Jorg want to dump the black boxes,
Alan maintains his original decision was right, what do others think?
On the whole i would side with the dumpers

sebastian