Re: \bookpaper parameters ignored

[Werner LEMBERG]

> > EC font encoding is simply not latin-1.
> 
> We assumed that EC font encoding matches EC.enc, but that seems not
> to be the case, or there are glitches?

Where is the problem?  If you select EC.enc, you get the glyphs
exactly in the order needed for LaTeX's T1 encoding.  Note that the
glyph names differ from cork.enc, but this basically doesn't matter
since the original EC fonts are in Metafont format, and the proper
Type 1 glyph names have to be set up separately during the conversion
process -- the MF sources have descriptive names like `The letter a
with gravis', bound to a certain glyph slot, but no valid Type 1 glyph
names.

> > If you manage to make lilypond use `latin1.enc' as the encoding
> > vector, everything is fine.
> 
> I do not understand.  latin1.enc (!= latin-1 != EC.enc) == EC
> > encoding ?

You have to reencode the EC fonts.  If I understand your intentions
correctly, you want to make the input encoding basically equal to the
output encoding, this is, for latin1, the glyphs at font positions
0x20-0x8F and 0xA0-0xFF should be the same as the input encoding
values.  Example: latin-1 0xFF (y dieresis) should map to output
encoding 0xFF too.  For this, lilypond already comes with latin1.enc
which does exactly this job.

> 
> >> There's also a problem with dash/minus.
> >
> > Which one?
> 
> I think Han-Wen told me that he already kludged around this, but I
> can't find it in the ChangeLog.

Hmm, you've apparently used EC.enc for the font conversion.  This uses
glyph name `\hyphen' for position 0x2D, while lilypond's latin1.enc
uses `\minus'.  You have either to change latin1.enc, replacing
`\minus' with `\hyphen', or renaming this glyph in the EC fonts
directly.  I suggest to rename latin1.enc to, say, lilypond-latin1.enc
and do the former.


    Werner