Author Topic: TTF vs SHX  (Read 5435 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Jeff H

  • Needs a day job
  • Posts: 6067
TTF vs SHX
« on: May 28, 2012, 09:15:04 PM »
We are going to start applying standards where I work and to make sure I got the the bases covered are these the basic considerations that need to be taken for fonts to be used.
  • If we want the text to be able to be searched in pdf format
  • performance
  • prints to look the same with clients
And are these assumptions correct? References below are where some of the assumptions came from
 
  • Using TTF it would look different only if plotted with a screened layer?
  • Use a .shx font for text or attributes inside a block?
  • All text inside of mtext will end up being TTF?
  • Leave all TTF with a Width factor of 1
  • Leave all TTF with Oblique Angle of 0

References
 
14 Fonts for all PDF readers
http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/trunk/fonts.html
Using TrueTyped fonts in AutoCAD
http://www.cadinfo.net/autocad/truetype-in-autocad-font-problems-revisited
 
Also for Company logo's etc. that mght use 'fancy' fonts then its best to convert text to polylines?

cadtag

  • Swamp Rat
  • Posts: 1117
Re: TTF vs SHX
« Reply #1 on: May 29, 2012, 08:38:55 AM »
 
  • Using TTF it would look different only if plotted with a screened layer?
  • Use a .shx font for text or attributes inside a block?
  • All text inside of mtext will end up being TTF?
  • Leave all TTF with a Width factor of 1
  • Leave all TTF with Oblique Angle of 0
 
Also for Company logo's etc. that mght use 'fancy' fonts then its best to convert text to polylines?

1)  essentially correct - a big advantage over shx is is that text used in a line is readable regardless of the width of the line.

2) Using TTF inside a block can be problematic if the block could/would be insterted at asymetric scales, or at a non-zero elevation. The non-zero elevation is evidently a relatively common problem, based on the number of complaints of 'fuzzy text'.

3) disagree on that - the TTF fonts supplied by Adesk (e.g. Romans.TTF) are used in the MTEXT Editor, but plotting/onscreen display uses the shx versions.  AFAIK, there are no real problems with using nothing but TTF in MText, and doing so does ensure that what you see in the editor is going to be much more closely aligned with the final hardcopy.

4) & 5) yes

6) absolutely true for best quality/ ease of distribution.  If you _want_ to make it harder to distribute dwgs that look like yours, use a custom logo font, and restrict it to in-house only.
The only thing more dangerous to the liberty of a free people than big government is big business