Gulim font not appearing in PDF created with FOP

[element...@gmail.com]

(Also posted in Yahoo DITA Users)

I'm using OT 1.5.4 and FOP to generate a PDF. The PDF includes Korean content, for which I am using the font Gulim. I have added this font definition to fop.xconf:

<font kerning="yes" embed-url="file:///C:/WINDOWS/Fonts/gulim.ttc" sub-font="GulimChe">       
   <font-triplet name="GulimChe" style="normal" weight="normal"/>         
   <font-triplet name="GulimChe" style="normal" weight="400"/>       
</font>
   
(It just so happens that this font is used in the FOP documentation as an example, so I feel pretty sure I've got the definition right. The fact that the documentation uses this particular font as an example also indicates that it should work with FOP.)   

Then I specified it as the Korean character set for all logical fonts in font-mappings.xml:

<logical-font name="Sans">
   <physical-font char-set="default">
      <font-face>Arial, Arial Unicode MS, Helvetica</font-face>
   </physical-font>
   ...
   <physical-font char-set="Korean">
      <font-face>GulimChe</font-face>
   </physical-font>
      ...
</logical-font>

The map I am publishing from has xml:lang set to "ko-kr".

Gulim/GulimChe is not used in the PDF. Gulim actually has two sub-fonts, Gulim and GulimChe, and I have tried every combination of those two things in fop.xconf and font-mappings.xml.

What am I overlooking? It is working correctly in XEP but unfortunately, that is not an option for this project.

Thanks,
Leigh

[mkaa...@gmail.com]

Hey Leigh, Shot in the dark here.

In your FOP config:

C:\PFW\Oxygen XML Editor 15\frameworks\dita\DITA-OT\plugins\org.dita.pdf2\fop\conf\fop.xconf

Have you tried commenting everything out and setting it to auto-detect?

<fonts>

        <!-- automatically detect operating system installed fonts -->

        <auto-detect/>

</fonts>

[element...@gmail.com]

Hi Matt,

I'm not using Oxygen--just using OT standalone--but yes, I have tried commenting out all font definitions and just using auto-detect. No love :-( Good suggestion, though.

Leigh

On Wednesday, October 9, 2013 10:52:42 AM UTC-5, mkaa...@gmail.com wrote:

Hey Leigh, Shot in the dark here.

e :-(