Dear Mr.Tom Ferguson,
 
I recently read your comments on the MS site -  Subject: PostScript fonts & 
XP-Pro. And found them very comprehensive!
 
I have installed MsOffice 2007 on WIndows XP replacing Office 2003.
When I am using 'Gill Sans Cyr MT' font ( PostScript) in theWord and Excel 
docs. I have the following problem with formatting.
When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no problems) 
but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically changes to 
Times New Roman ( only Cyrillic part I mean) . When I want to format it , 
selecting the text , pointing the request font Gill.... In the "Change the 
Font face" window - nothing happened . The font stay Times New...! Only using 
'Format Painter' solve my problem ( taking the format from Latin (English) 
part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE BEST SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think 
worked perfectly , now with 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my 
college's PC ( the same installation) .
 
Can you advice me please how I can solve this issue?


Regards,

Dimitar Gyoshev

This might be a case of font substitution. If you are using PostScript 
fonts, it sometimes happens that the font you want to use does not have the 
glyphs in the range you want to use (e.g. might have English and Hebrew but 
lack Cyrillic). To get around this, you must install and use fonts that have 
the range you need. Things are usually better if you stick to TrueType, 
Unicode fonts.

Hope this helps.

Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007

"Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
news:9D1270AA-B2B8-4E62-9972-DBEC4EC44AD5@microsoft.com...
> Dear Mr.Tom Ferguson,
>
> I recently read your comments on the MS site -  Subject: PostScript fonts 
> &
> XP-Pro. And found them very comprehensive!
>
> I have installed MsOffice 2007 on WIndows XP replacing Office 2003.
> When I am using 'Gill Sans Cyr MT' font ( PostScript) in theWord and Excel
> docs. I have the following problem with formatting.
> When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no problems)
> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically changes to
> Times New Roman ( only Cyrillic part I mean) . When I want to format it ,
> selecting the text , pointing the request font Gill.... In the "Change the
> Font face" window - nothing happened . The font stay Times New...! Only 
> using
> 'Format Painter' solve my problem ( taking the format from Latin (English)
> part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE BEST SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every 
> think
> worked perfectly , now with 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my
> college's PC ( the same installation) .
>
> Can you advice me please how I can solve this issue?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Dimitar Gyoshev

Sorry, trying to do too many things at once. Let me re-write to
reflect what I meant more clearly.

This might be a case of font substitution. If you are using Open Type
 fonts (whether they contain PostScript or TrueType outline data), it
 sometimes happens that the font you want to use does not have the
 glyphs in the range you want to use (e.g. might have English and Hebrew but
 lack Cyrillic). To get around this, you must install and use fonts that
have
 the range you need. Matters become more complex if you are using older,
non-Unicode, either TT or PS, fonts. Things are usually better if you stick
to OT with TT data, Unicode fonts.

 Tom
 MSMVP 1998-2007
{Snip}

Tom Ferguson wrote:

> Sorry, trying to do too many things at once. Let me re-write to
> reflect what I meant more clearly.
> 
> This might be a case of font substitution. If you are using Open Type
> fonts (whether they contain PostScript or TrueType outline data), it
> sometimes happens that the font you want to use does not have the
> glyphs in the range you want to use (e.g. might have English and Hebrew but
> lack Cyrillic). To get around this, you must install and use fonts that
> have
> the range you need. Matters become more complex if you are using older,
> non-Unicode, either TT or PS, fonts. Things are usually better if you stick
> to OT with TT data, Unicode fonts.
> 
> Tom
> MSMVP 1998-2007
> {Snip}

Glad you clarified! This one makes a lot more sense :)

Why do you say that things are usually better with OT fonts with TT 
data than OT with PS data? Unless I'm missing something, the only 
difference is whether or not any of the outlines have 3rd degree 
curves, in which case the font must be a PS flavor. Things like 
unicode compliance and OT feature sets are independent of the OT 
flavor and can be equally good or bad.

  - Character

The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has nothing to do 
with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs present. Those with 
TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no technical reason 
why that should be so, it is just the present state. It is my impression 
that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little more than placing a 
wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt that will change as 
various foundries issue updates and new fonts in that format.

Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007

"Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message 
news:thZ2j.7752$5R1.3120@fe03.news.easynews.com...
> Tom Ferguson wrote:
>
>> Sorry, trying to do too many things at once. Let me re-write to
>> reflect what I meant more clearly.
>>
>> This might be a case of font substitution. If you are using Open Type
>> fonts (whether they contain PostScript or TrueType outline data), it
>> sometimes happens that the font you want to use does not have the
>> glyphs in the range you want to use (e.g. might have English and Hebrew 
>> but
>> lack Cyrillic). To get around this, you must install and use fonts that
>> have
>> the range you need. Matters become more complex if you are using older,
>> non-Unicode, either TT or PS, fonts. Things are usually better if you 
>> stick
>> to OT with TT data, Unicode fonts.
>>
>> Tom
>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> {Snip}
>
> Glad you clarified! This one makes a lot more sense :)
>
> Why do you say that things are usually better with OT fonts with TT data 
> than OT with PS data? Unless I'm missing something, the only difference is 
> whether or not any of the outlines have 3rd degree curves, in which case 
> the font must be a PS flavor. Things like unicode compliance and OT 
> feature sets are independent of the OT flavor and can be equally good or 
> bad.
>
>  - Character

Tom Ferguson wrote:

> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has nothing to 
> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs present. 
> Those with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no 
> technical reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It 
> is my impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little 
> more than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt 
> that will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in 
> that format.
> 
> Tom
> MSMVP 1998-2007
>

Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing more than 
someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT 
instead of TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger 
glyph set than T1 fonts, those sets are carried forward.

But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat limited sample.

In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a couple of 
years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features of 
anything available.

Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language 
coverage, while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater 
typographic support, with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, 
position-sensitive glyph selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.

  - Character

I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on cross-language support 
as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. Indeed, in 
various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, I have 
urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might have. And, 
of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours and 
anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that the OP's 
issue had to do with language coverage.

However, you make fair observation/comment.

Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007

"Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message 
news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
> Tom Ferguson wrote:
>
>> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has nothing to 
>> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs present. Those 
>> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no technical 
>> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It is my 
>> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little more 
>> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt that 
>> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in that 
>> format.
>>
>> Tom
>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>>
>
> Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing more than 
> someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT instead of 
> TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set than T1 
> fonts, those sets are carried forward.
>
> But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat limited sample.
>
> In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a couple of 
> years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features of 
> anything available.
>
> Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language coverage, 
> while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic support, 
> with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive glyph 
> selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
>
>  - Character
>

Gentlemen,

Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another directory too 
far away from my question!

Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 2007 and usage 
of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
1. This is our Company font !
2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
3. Cirllic is available in this font !
4. I will repeit the question  again
" When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no problems) 
but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically changes to 
Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I mean) . When I 
want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request font Gill Sans 
Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window - nothing happened 
. The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' solve my problem 
(taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE BEST 
SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked perfectly!!! , now with 
2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the same 
installation) .

This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS fonts!


-- 
Dimitar Gyoshev


"Tom Ferguson" wrote:

> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on cross-language support 
> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. Indeed, in 
> various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, I have 
> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might have. And, 
> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours and 
> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that the OP's 
> issue had to do with language coverage.
> 
> However, you make fair observation/comment.
> 
> Tom
> MSMVP 1998-2007
> 
> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message 
> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
> >
> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has nothing to 
> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs present. Those 
> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no technical 
> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It is my 
> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little more 
> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt that 
> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in that 
> >> format.
> >>
> >> Tom
> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
> >>
> >
> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing more than 
> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT instead of 
> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set than T1 
> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
> >
> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat limited sample.
> >
> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a couple of 
> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features of 
> > anything available.
> >
> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language coverage, 
> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic support, 
> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive glyph 
> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
> >
> >  - Character
> > 
> 
>

Sorry, we did drift quite far from the centre of your question.

I am quite puzzled. I have very little experience using anything but 
English, and a bit of French and a few sentences of Gaelic. I have sent off 
a query and am doing some checking. I'll get back to you here.

Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007

"Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
> Gentlemen,
>
> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another directory too
> far away from my question!
>
> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 2007 and 
> usage
> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
> 1. This is our Company font !
> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
> 4. I will repeit the question  again
> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no 
> problems)
> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically changes to
> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I mean) . When I
> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request font Gill 
> Sans
> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window - nothing 
> happened
> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' solve my 
> problem
> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE BEST
> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked perfectly!!! , now 
> with
> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the same
> installation) .
>
> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS fonts!
>
>
> -- 
> Dimitar Gyoshev
>
>
> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>
>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on cross-language 
>> support
>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. Indeed, in
>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, I have
>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might have. 
>> And,
>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours and
>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that the OP's
>> issue had to do with language coverage.
>>
>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
>>
>> Tom
>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>>
>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
>> >
>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has nothing 
>> >> to
>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs present. 
>> >> Those
>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no 
>> >> technical
>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It is my
>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little more
>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt that
>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in that
>> >> format.
>> >>
>> >> Tom
>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >>
>> >
>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing more than
>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT instead 
>> > of
>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set than 
>> > T1
>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
>> >
>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat limited 
>> > sample.
>> >
>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a couple of
>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features of
>> > anything available.
>> >
>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language coverage,
>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic support,
>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive glyph
>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
>> >
>> >  - Character
>> >
>>
>>

Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType version of Gill 
Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy the TrueType 
version to a different folder in order to back up the files and then delete 
the TrueType files. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem 
remains.

Tom
MSMVP 19989-2007

"Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
> Gentlemen,
>
> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another directory too
> far away from my question!
>
> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 2007 and 
> usage
> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
> 1. This is our Company font !
> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
> 4. I will repeit the question  again
> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no 
> problems)
> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically changes to
> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I mean) . When I
> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request font Gill 
> Sans
> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window - nothing 
> happened
> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' solve my 
> problem
> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE BEST
> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked perfectly!!! , now 
> with
> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the same
> installation) .
>
> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS fonts!
>
>
> -- 
> Dimitar Gyoshev
>
>
> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>
>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on cross-language 
>> support
>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. Indeed, in
>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, I have
>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might have. 
>> And,
>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours and
>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that the OP's
>> issue had to do with language coverage.
>>
>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
>>
>> Tom
>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>>
>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
>> >
>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has nothing 
>> >> to
>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs present. 
>> >> Those
>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no 
>> >> technical
>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It is my
>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little more
>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt that
>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in that
>> >> format.
>> >>
>> >> Tom
>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >>
>> >
>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing more than
>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT instead 
>> > of
>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set than 
>> > T1
>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
>> >
>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat limited 
>> > sample.
>> >
>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a couple of
>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features of
>> > anything available.
>> >
>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language coverage,
>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic support,
>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive glyph
>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
>> >
>> >  - Character
>> >
>>
>>

"Tom Ferguson"  wrote in message 
news:%23tkEYCiMIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType version of Gill 
> Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy the 
> TrueType version to a different folder in order to back up the files and 
> then delete the TrueType files

+++from the font folder+++

. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem
> remains.
>
> Tom
> MSMVP 19989-2007
>
> "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
> news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
>> Gentlemen,
>>
>> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another directory 
>> too
>> far away from my question!
>>
>> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 2007 and 
>> usage
>> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
>> 1. This is our Company font !
>> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
>> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
>> 4. I will repeit the question  again
>> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no 
>> problems)
>> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically changes to
>> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I mean) . When 
>> I
>> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request font Gill 
>> Sans
>> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window - nothing 
>> happened
>> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' solve my 
>> problem
>> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE BEST
>> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked perfectly!!! , now 
>> with
>> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the same
>> installation) .
>>
>> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS fonts!
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Dimitar Gyoshev
>>
>>
>> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>>
>>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on cross-language 
>>> support
>>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. Indeed, in
>>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, I have
>>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might have. 
>>> And,
>>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours and
>>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that the 
>>> OP's
>>> issue had to do with language coverage.
>>>
>>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
>>>
>>> Tom
>>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>>>
>>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
>>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
>>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
>>> >
>>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has nothing 
>>> >> to
>>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs present. 
>>> >> Those
>>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no 
>>> >> technical
>>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It is my
>>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little 
>>> >> more
>>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt that
>>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in that
>>> >> format.
>>> >>
>>> >> Tom
>>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing more than
>>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT 
>>> > instead of
>>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set than 
>>> > T1
>>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
>>> >
>>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat limited 
>>> > sample.
>>> >
>>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a couple of
>>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features of
>>> > anything available.
>>> >
>>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language 
>>> > coverage,
>>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic support,
>>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive glyph
>>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
>>> >
>>> >  - Character
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>

Thank you Tom ,

But I haven't TrueType version of Gill Sans Cyr MT font.
Could you advice me with the name of the best software for convert from 
Postscript to TrueType version ( if any is available),Please?
-- 
Dimitar Gyoshev


"Tom Ferguson" wrote:

> 
> "Tom Ferguson"  wrote in message 
> news:%23tkEYCiMIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> > Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType version of Gill 
> > Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy the 
> > TrueType version to a different folder in order to back up the files and 
> > then delete the TrueType files
> 
> +++from the font folder+++
> 
> .. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem
> > remains.
> >
> > Tom
> > MSMVP 19989-2007
> >
> > "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
> > news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
> >> Gentlemen,
> >>
> >> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another directory 
> >> too
> >> far away from my question!
> >>
> >> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 2007 and 
> >> usage
> >> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
> >> 1. This is our Company font !
> >> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
> >> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
> >> 4. I will repeit the question  again
> >> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no 
> >> problems)
> >> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically changes to
> >> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I mean) . When 
> >> I
> >> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request font Gill 
> >> Sans
> >> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window - nothing 
> >> happened
> >> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' solve my 
> >> problem
> >> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE BEST
> >> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked perfectly!!! , now 
> >> with
> >> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the same
> >> installation) .
> >>
> >> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS fonts!
> >>
> >>
> >> -- 
> >> Dimitar Gyoshev
> >>
> >>
> >> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
> >>
> >>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on cross-language 
> >>> support
> >>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. Indeed, in
> >>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, I have
> >>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might have. 
> >>> And,
> >>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours and
> >>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that the 
> >>> OP's
> >>> issue had to do with language coverage.
> >>>
> >>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
> >>>
> >>> Tom
> >>> MSMVP 1998-2007
> >>>
> >>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
> >>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
> >>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has nothing 
> >>> >> to
> >>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs present. 
> >>> >> Those
> >>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no 
> >>> >> technical
> >>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It is my
> >>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little 
> >>> >> more
> >>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt that
> >>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in that
> >>> >> format.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> Tom
> >>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing more than
> >>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT 
> >>> > instead of
> >>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set than 
> >>> > T1
> >>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
> >>> >
> >>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat limited 
> >>> > sample.
> >>> >
> >>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a couple of
> >>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features of
> >>> > anything available.
> >>> >
> >>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language 
> >>> > coverage,
> >>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic support,
> >>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive glyph
> >>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
> >>> >
> >>> >  - Character
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> > 
> 
>

One reply from my query was
"My guess is that there something about the font that doesn’t meet the 
spec – could be code page or Unicode range bits not being properly set."

On that issue, contact Monotype.

Check FontLab website for a converter.
http://www.fontlab.com/

Check your computer for any variety of Gill Sans in Truetype format. E.g. 
some Microsoft products ship with one on the CD or DVD and will install it. 
That version does _not_ have Cyrillic glyphs and if it is being substituted 
for the MT PostScript font, you would get the result you experience.

Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007

"Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
news:B0008063-571E-4938-9F9F-CEF03658A55C@microsoft.com...
> Thank you Tom ,
>
> But I haven't TrueType version of Gill Sans Cyr MT font.
> Could you advice me with the name of the best software for convert from
> Postscript to TrueType version ( if any is available),Please?
> -- 
> Dimitar Gyoshev
>
>
> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>
>>
>> "Tom Ferguson"  wrote in message
>> news:%23tkEYCiMIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> > Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType version of 
>> > Gill
>> > Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy the
>> > TrueType version to a different folder in order to back up the files 
>> > and
>> > then delete the TrueType files
>>
>> +++from the font folder+++
>>
>> .. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem
>> > remains.
>> >
>> > Tom
>> > MSMVP 19989-2007
>> >
>> > "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
>> > news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
>> >> Gentlemen,
>> >>
>> >> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another directory
>> >> too
>> >> far away from my question!
>> >>
>> >> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 2007 and
>> >> usage
>> >> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
>> >> 1. This is our Company font !
>> >> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
>> >> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
>> >> 4. I will repeit the question  again
>> >> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no
>> >> problems)
>> >> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically changes 
>> >> to
>> >> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I mean) . 
>> >> When
>> >> I
>> >> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request font 
>> >> Gill
>> >> Sans
>> >> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window - nothing
>> >> happened
>> >> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' solve my
>> >> problem
>> >> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE 
>> >> BEST
>> >> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked perfectly!!! , 
>> >> now
>> >> with
>> >> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the same
>> >> installation) .
>> >>
>> >> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS fonts!
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> -- 
>> >> Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on cross-language
>> >>> support
>> >>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. Indeed, 
>> >>> in
>> >>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, I 
>> >>> have
>> >>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might 
>> >>> have.
>> >>> And,
>> >>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours and
>> >>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that the
>> >>> OP's
>> >>> issue had to do with language coverage.
>> >>>
>> >>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
>> >>>
>> >>> Tom
>> >>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >>>
>> >>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
>> >>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
>> >>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has 
>> >>> >> nothing
>> >>> >> to
>> >>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs 
>> >>> >> present.
>> >>> >> Those
>> >>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no
>> >>> >> technical
>> >>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It is 
>> >>> >> my
>> >>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little
>> >>> >> more
>> >>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt 
>> >>> >> that
>> >>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in 
>> >>> >> that
>> >>> >> format.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Tom
>> >>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing more 
>> >>> > than
>> >>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT
>> >>> > instead of
>> >>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set 
>> >>> > than
>> >>> > T1
>> >>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat limited
>> >>> > sample.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a couple 
>> >>> > of
>> >>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features of
>> >>> > anything available.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language
>> >>> > coverage,
>> >>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic 
>> >>> > support,
>> >>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive glyph
>> >>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >  - Character
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >
>>
>>

Tom,

Thank you for the attention and advices.
On this way to convert the fonts I will find solution ( probably), 
BUT ANY HOW THIS IS A BUG IN THE MsOffice 2007 as many others and the hope 
that Ms will repare it is left!

Wish you all the best and Merry Christmas!

-- 
Dimitar Gyoshev


"Tom Ferguson" wrote:

> One reply from my query was
> "My guess is that there something about the font that doesn’t meet the 
> spec – could be code page or Unicode range bits not being properly set."
> 
> On that issue, contact Monotype.
> 
> Check FontLab website for a converter.
> http://www.fontlab.com/
> 
> Check your computer for any variety of Gill Sans in Truetype format. E.g. 
> some Microsoft products ship with one on the CD or DVD and will install it. 
> That version does _not_ have Cyrillic glyphs and if it is being substituted 
> for the MT PostScript font, you would get the result you experience.
> 
> Tom
> MSMVP 1998-2007
> 
> "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
> news:B0008063-571E-4938-9F9F-CEF03658A55C@microsoft.com...
> > Thank you Tom ,
> >
> > But I haven't TrueType version of Gill Sans Cyr MT font.
> > Could you advice me with the name of the best software for convert from
> > Postscript to TrueType version ( if any is available),Please?
> > -- 
> > Dimitar Gyoshev
> >
> >
> > "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> "Tom Ferguson"  wrote in message
> >> news:%23tkEYCiMIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >> > Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType version of 
> >> > Gill
> >> > Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy the
> >> > TrueType version to a different folder in order to back up the files 
> >> > and
> >> > then delete the TrueType files
> >>
> >> +++from the font folder+++
> >>
> >> .. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem
> >> > remains.
> >> >
> >> > Tom
> >> > MSMVP 19989-2007
> >> >
> >> > "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
> >> > news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
> >> >> Gentlemen,
> >> >>
> >> >> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another directory
> >> >> too
> >> >> far away from my question!
> >> >>
> >> >> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 2007 and
> >> >> usage
> >> >> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
> >> >> 1. This is our Company font !
> >> >> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
> >> >> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
> >> >> 4. I will repeit the question  again
> >> >> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no
> >> >> problems)
> >> >> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically changes 
> >> >> to
> >> >> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I mean) . 
> >> >> When
> >> >> I
> >> >> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request font 
> >> >> Gill
> >> >> Sans
> >> >> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window - nothing
> >> >> happened
> >> >> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' solve my
> >> >> problem
> >> >> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE 
> >> >> BEST
> >> >> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked perfectly!!! , 
> >> >> now
> >> >> with
> >> >> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the same
> >> >> installation) .
> >> >>
> >> >> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS fonts!
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> -- 
> >> >> Dimitar Gyoshev
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on cross-language
> >> >>> support
> >> >>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. Indeed, 
> >> >>> in
> >> >>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, I 
> >> >>> have
> >> >>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might 
> >> >>> have.
> >> >>> And,
> >> >>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours and
> >> >>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that the
> >> >>> OP's
> >> >>> issue had to do with language coverage.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Tom
> >> >>> MSMVP 1998-2007
> >> >>>
> >> >>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
> >> >>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
> >> >>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has 
> >> >>> >> nothing
> >> >>> >> to
> >> >>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs 
> >> >>> >> present.
> >> >>> >> Those
> >> >>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no
> >> >>> >> technical
> >> >>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It is 
> >> >>> >> my
> >> >>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by little
> >> >>> >> more
> >> >>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No doubt 
> >> >>> >> that
> >> >>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in 
> >> >>> >> that
> >> >>> >> format.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Tom
> >> >>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing more 
> >> >>> > than
> >> >>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT
> >> >>> > instead of
> >> >>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set 
> >> >>> > than
> >> >>> > T1
> >> >>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat limited
> >> >>> > sample.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a couple 
> >> >>> > of
> >> >>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features of
> >> >>> > anything available.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language
> >> >>> > coverage,
> >> >>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic 
> >> >>> > support,
> >> >>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive glyph
> >> >>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >  - Character
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >
> >>
> >> 
> 
>

I hope it works for you.

I am not sure that what you are seeing is a "bug" in the strict sense. As I 
understand the term, a "bug" is a fault or flaw in the system that results 
in improper operation. Historically, the original "bug" was literally that. 
A moth had somehow gotten squashed between the electrical contacts of a 
relay in an main-frame computer and cause a malfunction. Thus, there was a 
"bug" that caused an error. The term stuck. In this case, I suspect the 
system is operating as intended. However, there is at least one consequence 
of that operation-as-designed of the font substitution system, it gives an 
intended result, the font is substituted according to the rule set; however, 
you see a failure to render the Cyrillic glyphs properly. So, technically, 
there is not a "bug" but an unsuitable intended result.

But, in a sense, this is hair-splitting. The result is not what you need or 
want.

I would suggest contacting Monotype and seek their advice on changing your 
corporate font to one that has the look and feel you want and whose files 
will work with Office 2007 and the operating system possibly an Open Type 
Gill Sans.

All the best.

Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007

"Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
news:3C25A536-33D1-4502-AD46-36333EA3FB93@microsoft.com...
> Tom,
>
> Thank you for the attention and advices.
> On this way to convert the fonts I will find solution ( probably),
> BUT ANY HOW THIS IS A BUG IN THE MsOffice 2007 as many others and the hope
> that Ms will repare it is left!
>
> Wish you all the best and Merry Christmas!
>
> -- 
> Dimitar Gyoshev
>
>
> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>
>> One reply from my query was
>> "My guess is that there something about the font that doesn’t meet the
>> spec – could be code page or Unicode range bits not being properly set."
>>
>> On that issue, contact Monotype.
>>
>> Check FontLab website for a converter.
>> http://www.fontlab.com/
>>
>> Check your computer for any variety of Gill Sans in Truetype format. E.g.
>> some Microsoft products ship with one on the CD or DVD and will install 
>> it.
>> That version does _not_ have Cyrillic glyphs and if it is being 
>> substituted
>> for the MT PostScript font, you would get the result you experience.
>>
>> Tom
>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>>
>> "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
>> news:B0008063-571E-4938-9F9F-CEF03658A55C@microsoft.com...
>> > Thank you Tom ,
>> >
>> > But I haven't TrueType version of Gill Sans Cyr MT font.
>> > Could you advice me with the name of the best software for convert from
>> > Postscript to TrueType version ( if any is available),Please?
>> > -- 
>> > Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >
>> >
>> > "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "Tom Ferguson"  wrote in message
>> >> news:%23tkEYCiMIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> >> > Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType version 
>> >> > of
>> >> > Gill
>> >> > Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy the
>> >> > TrueType version to a different folder in order to back up the files
>> >> > and
>> >> > then delete the TrueType files
>> >>
>> >> +++from the font folder+++
>> >>
>> >> .. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem
>> >> > remains.
>> >> >
>> >> > Tom
>> >> > MSMVP 19989-2007
>> >> >
>> >> > "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
>> >> > news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
>> >> >> Gentlemen,
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another 
>> >> >> directory
>> >> >> too
>> >> >> far away from my question!
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 2007 
>> >> >> and
>> >> >> usage
>> >> >> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
>> >> >> 1. This is our Company font !
>> >> >> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
>> >> >> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
>> >> >> 4. I will repeit the question  again
>> >> >> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no
>> >> >> problems)
>> >> >> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically 
>> >> >> changes
>> >> >> to
>> >> >> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I mean) .
>> >> >> When
>> >> >> I
>> >> >> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request font
>> >> >> Gill
>> >> >> Sans
>> >> >> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window - 
>> >> >> nothing
>> >> >> happened
>> >> >> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' solve 
>> >> >> my
>> >> >> problem
>> >> >> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE
>> >> >> BEST
>> >> >> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked perfectly!!! ,
>> >> >> now
>> >> >> with
>> >> >> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the same
>> >> >> installation) .
>> >> >>
>> >> >> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS 
>> >> >> fonts!
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> -- 
>> >> >> Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on 
>> >> >>> cross-language
>> >> >>> support
>> >> >>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. 
>> >> >>> Indeed,
>> >> >>> in
>> >> >>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, 
>> >> >>> I
>> >> >>> have
>> >> >>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might
>> >> >>> have.
>> >> >>> And,
>> >> >>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours 
>> >> >>> and
>> >> >>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that 
>> >> >>> the
>> >> >>> OP's
>> >> >>> issue had to do with language coverage.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Tom
>> >> >>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
>> >> >>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
>> >> >>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has
>> >> >>> >> nothing
>> >> >>> >> to
>> >> >>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs
>> >> >>> >> present.
>> >> >>> >> Those
>> >> >>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no
>> >> >>> >> technical
>> >> >>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It 
>> >> >>> >> is
>> >> >>> >> my
>> >> >>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by 
>> >> >>> >> little
>> >> >>> >> more
>> >> >>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No 
>> >> >>> >> doubt
>> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in
>> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >>> >> format.
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >> Tom
>> >> >>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >> >>> >>
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing 
>> >> >>> > more
>> >> >>> > than
>> >> >>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT
>> >> >>> > instead of
>> >> >>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set
>> >> >>> > than
>> >> >>> > T1
>> >> >>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat 
>> >> >>> > limited
>> >> >>> > sample.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a 
>> >> >>> > couple
>> >> >>> > of
>> >> >>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features 
>> >> >>> > of
>> >> >>> > anything available.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language
>> >> >>> > coverage,
>> >> >>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic
>> >> >>> > support,
>> >> >>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive 
>> >> >>> > glyph
>> >> >>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> >  - Character
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>

Thank you Tom,

I will consult with the Managers to follow your advice for looking for Gil 
Sans - OpenType . I am not a big font specialist, could you advice me with 
stipulation of the request for improving the company font, Please! 

I mean how to formulate them the request 'To buy Gill Sans Cyr Open Type or 
Trough type ' or..... however is called ???!?? but not PostScript . Help me 
please.

P.S. This historical explanation of the "bug" was funny!!
-- 
Dimitar Gyoshev


"Tom Ferguson" wrote:

> I hope it works for you.
> 
> I am not sure that what you are seeing is a "bug" in the strict sense. As I 
> understand the term, a "bug" is a fault or flaw in the system that results 
> in improper operation. Historically, the original "bug" was literally that. 
> A moth had somehow gotten squashed between the electrical contacts of a 
> relay in an main-frame computer and cause a malfunction. Thus, there was a 
> "bug" that caused an error. The term stuck. In this case, I suspect the 
> system is operating as intended. However, there is at least one consequence 
> of that operation-as-designed of the font substitution system, it gives an 
> intended result, the font is substituted according to the rule set; however, 
> you see a failure to render the Cyrillic glyphs properly. So, technically, 
> there is not a "bug" but an unsuitable intended result.
> 
> But, in a sense, this is hair-splitting. The result is not what you need or 
> want.
> 
> I would suggest contacting Monotype and seek their advice on changing your 
> corporate font to one that has the look and feel you want and whose files 
> will work with Office 2007 and the operating system possibly an Open Type 
> Gill Sans.
> 
> All the best.
> 
> Tom
> MSMVP 1998-2007
> 
> "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
> news:3C25A536-33D1-4502-AD46-36333EA3FB93@microsoft.com...
> > Tom,
> >
> > Thank you for the attention and advices.
> > On this way to convert the fonts I will find solution ( probably),
> > BUT ANY HOW THIS IS A BUG IN THE MsOffice 2007 as many others and the hope
> > that Ms will repare it is left!
> >
> > Wish you all the best and Merry Christmas!
> >
> > -- 
> > Dimitar Gyoshev
> >
> >
> > "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
> >
> >> One reply from my query was
> >> "My guess is that there something about the font that doesn’t meet the
> >> spec – could be code page or Unicode range bits not being properly set."
> >>
> >> On that issue, contact Monotype.
> >>
> >> Check FontLab website for a converter.
> >> http://www.fontlab.com/
> >>
> >> Check your computer for any variety of Gill Sans in Truetype format. E.g.
> >> some Microsoft products ship with one on the CD or DVD and will install 
> >> it.
> >> That version does _not_ have Cyrillic glyphs and if it is being 
> >> substituted
> >> for the MT PostScript font, you would get the result you experience.
> >>
> >> Tom
> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
> >>
> >> "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
> >> news:B0008063-571E-4938-9F9F-CEF03658A55C@microsoft.com...
> >> > Thank you Tom ,
> >> >
> >> > But I haven't TrueType version of Gill Sans Cyr MT font.
> >> > Could you advice me with the name of the best software for convert from
> >> > Postscript to TrueType version ( if any is available),Please?
> >> > -- 
> >> > Dimitar Gyoshev
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> "Tom Ferguson"  wrote in message
> >> >> news:%23tkEYCiMIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> >> >> > Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType version 
> >> >> > of
> >> >> > Gill
> >> >> > Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy the
> >> >> > TrueType version to a different folder in order to back up the files
> >> >> > and
> >> >> > then delete the TrueType files
> >> >>
> >> >> +++from the font folder+++
> >> >>
> >> >> .. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem
> >> >> > remains.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Tom
> >> >> > MSMVP 19989-2007
> >> >> >
> >> >> > "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
> >> >> > news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
> >> >> >> Gentlemen,
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another 
> >> >> >> directory
> >> >> >> too
> >> >> >> far away from my question!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 2007 
> >> >> >> and
> >> >> >> usage
> >> >> >> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
> >> >> >> 1. This is our Company font !
> >> >> >> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
> >> >> >> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
> >> >> >> 4. I will repeit the question  again
> >> >> >> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means no
> >> >> >> problems)
> >> >> >> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically 
> >> >> >> changes
> >> >> >> to
> >> >> >> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I mean) .
> >> >> >> When
> >> >> >> I
> >> >> >> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request font
> >> >> >> Gill
> >> >> >> Sans
> >> >> >> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window - 
> >> >> >> nothing
> >> >> >> happened
> >> >> >> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' solve 
> >> >> >> my
> >> >> >> problem
> >> >> >> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT THE
> >> >> >> BEST
> >> >> >> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked perfectly!!! ,
> >> >> >> now
> >> >> >> with
> >> >> >> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the same
> >> >> >> installation) .
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS 
> >> >> >> fonts!
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> -- 
> >> >> >> Dimitar Gyoshev
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on 
> >> >> >>> cross-language
> >> >> >>> support
> >> >> >>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention. 
> >> >> >>> Indeed,
> >> >> >>> in
> >> >> >>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography department, 
> >> >> >>> I
> >> >> >>> have
> >> >> >>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I might
> >> >> >>> have.
> >> >> >>> And,
> >> >> >>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like yours 
> >> >> >>> and
> >> >> >>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall that 
> >> >> >>> the
> >> >> >>> OP's
> >> >> >>> issue had to do with language coverage.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Tom
> >> >> >>> MSMVP 1998-2007
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
> >> >> >>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
> >> >> >>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data has
> >> >> >>> >> nothing
> >> >> >>> >> to
> >> >> >>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs
> >> >> >>> >> present.
> >> >> >>> >> Those
> >> >> >>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is no
> >> >> >>> >> technical
> >> >> >>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. It 
> >> >> >>> >> is
> >> >> >>> >> my
> >> >> >>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by 
> >> >> >>> >> little
> >> >> >>> >> more
> >> >> >>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No 
> >> >> >>> >> doubt
> >> >> >>> >> that
> >> >> >>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts in
> >> >> >>> >> that
> >> >> >>> >> format.
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >> Tom
> >> >> >>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
> >> >> >>> >>
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing 
> >> >> >>> > more
> >> >> >>> > than
> >> >> >>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as OT
> >> >> >>> > instead of
> >> >> >>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph set
> >> >> >>> > than
> >> >> >>> > T1
> >> >> >>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat 
> >> >> >>> > limited
> >> >> >>> > sample.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a 
> >> >> >>> > couple
> >> >> >>> > of
> >> >> >>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type features 
> >> >> >>> > of
> >> >> >>> > anything available.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language
> >> >> >>> > coverage,
> >> >> >>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic
> >> >> >>> > support,
> >> >> >>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive 
> >> >> >>> > glyph
> >> >> >>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>> >  - Character
> >> >> >>> >
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >>
> >> 
> 
>

I would first contact Monotype Imaging or other good source to ask them 
which package would be best for the company's use. Probably, a package of 
Open Type fonts would serve best.

This is one possibility.
http://tinyurl.com/39n8zo

Be sure to tell them which operating system or systems and applications you 
intend to use it with.

After that discussion, you will better be able to offer the managers good 
advice.

Tom
MSMVP 1998-2007



"Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
news:0D612E7E-0DCA-4255-B286-8D4952FF0851@microsoft.com...
> Thank you Tom,
>
> I will consult with the Managers to follow your advice for looking for Gil
> Sans - OpenType . I am not a big font specialist, could you advice me with
> stipulation of the request for improving the company font, Please!
>
> I mean how to formulate them the request 'To buy Gill Sans Cyr Open Type 
> or
> Trough type ' or..... however is called ???!?? but not PostScript . Help 
> me
> please.
>
> P.S. This historical explanation of the "bug" was funny!!
> -- 
> Dimitar Gyoshev
>
>
> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>
>> I hope it works for you.
>>
>> I am not sure that what you are seeing is a "bug" in the strict sense. As 
>> I
>> understand the term, a "bug" is a fault or flaw in the system that 
>> results
>> in improper operation. Historically, the original "bug" was literally 
>> that.
>> A moth had somehow gotten squashed between the electrical contacts of a
>> relay in an main-frame computer and cause a malfunction. Thus, there was 
>> a
>> "bug" that caused an error. The term stuck. In this case, I suspect the
>> system is operating as intended. However, there is at least one 
>> consequence
>> of that operation-as-designed of the font substitution system, it gives 
>> an
>> intended result, the font is substituted according to the rule set; 
>> however,
>> you see a failure to render the Cyrillic glyphs properly. So, 
>> technically,
>> there is not a "bug" but an unsuitable intended result.
>>
>> But, in a sense, this is hair-splitting. The result is not what you need 
>> or
>> want.
>>
>> I would suggest contacting Monotype and seek their advice on changing 
>> your
>> corporate font to one that has the look and feel you want and whose files
>> will work with Office 2007 and the operating system possibly an Open Type
>> Gill Sans.
>>
>> All the best.
>>
>> Tom
>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>>
>> "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
>> news:3C25A536-33D1-4502-AD46-36333EA3FB93@microsoft.com...
>> > Tom,
>> >
>> > Thank you for the attention and advices.
>> > On this way to convert the fonts I will find solution ( probably),
>> > BUT ANY HOW THIS IS A BUG IN THE MsOffice 2007 as many others and the 
>> > hope
>> > that Ms will repare it is left!
>> >
>> > Wish you all the best and Merry Christmas!
>> >
>> > -- 
>> > Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >
>> >
>> > "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >
>> >> One reply from my query was
>> >> "My guess is that there something about the font that doesn’t meet the
>> >> spec – could be code page or Unicode range bits not being properly 
>> >> set."
>> >>
>> >> On that issue, contact Monotype.
>> >>
>> >> Check FontLab website for a converter.
>> >> http://www.fontlab.com/
>> >>
>> >> Check your computer for any variety of Gill Sans in Truetype format. 
>> >> E.g.
>> >> some Microsoft products ship with one on the CD or DVD and will 
>> >> install
>> >> it.
>> >> That version does _not_ have Cyrillic glyphs and if it is being
>> >> substituted
>> >> for the MT PostScript font, you would get the result you experience.
>> >>
>> >> Tom
>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >>
>> >> "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
>> >> news:B0008063-571E-4938-9F9F-CEF03658A55C@microsoft.com...
>> >> > Thank you Tom ,
>> >> >
>> >> > But I haven't TrueType version of Gill Sans Cyr MT font.
>> >> > Could you advice me with the name of the best software for convert 
>> >> > from
>> >> > Postscript to TrueType version ( if any is available),Please?
>> >> > -- 
>> >> > Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Tom Ferguson"  wrote in message
>> >> >> news:%23tkEYCiMIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> > Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType 
>> >> >> > version
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> > Gill
>> >> >> > Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy 
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > TrueType version to a different folder in order to back up the 
>> >> >> > files
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> > then delete the TrueType files
>> >> >>
>> >> >> +++from the font folder+++
>> >> >>
>> >> >> .. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem
>> >> >> > remains.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Tom
>> >> >> > MSMVP 19989-2007
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
>> >> >> > news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
>> >> >> >> Gentlemen,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another
>> >> >> >> directory
>> >> >> >> too
>> >> >> >> far away from my question!
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 
>> >> >> >> 2007
>> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> usage
>> >> >> >> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
>> >> >> >> 1. This is our Company font !
>> >> >> >> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
>> >> >> >> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
>> >> >> >> 4. I will repeit the question  again
>> >> >> >> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means 
>> >> >> >> no
>> >> >> >> problems)
>> >> >> >> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically
>> >> >> >> changes
>> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I 
>> >> >> >> mean) .
>> >> >> >> When
>> >> >> >> I
>> >> >> >> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request 
>> >> >> >> font
>> >> >> >> Gill
>> >> >> >> Sans
>> >> >> >> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window -
>> >> >> >> nothing
>> >> >> >> happened
>> >> >> >> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' 
>> >> >> >> solve
>> >> >> >> my
>> >> >> >> problem
>> >> >> >> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT 
>> >> >> >> THE
>> >> >> >> BEST
>> >> >> >> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked 
>> >> >> >> perfectly!!! ,
>> >> >> >> now
>> >> >> >> with
>> >> >> >> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the 
>> >> >> >> same
>> >> >> >> installation) .
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS
>> >> >> >> fonts!
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> -- 
>> >> >> >> Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on
>> >> >> >>> cross-language
>> >> >> >>> support
>> >> >> >>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention.
>> >> >> >>> Indeed,
>> >> >> >>> in
>> >> >> >>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography 
>> >> >> >>> department,
>> >> >> >>> I
>> >> >> >>> have
>> >> >> >>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I 
>> >> >> >>> might
>> >> >> >>> have.
>> >> >> >>> And,
>> >> >> >>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like 
>> >> >> >>> yours
>> >> >> >>> and
>> >> >> >>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall 
>> >> >> >>> that
>> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >>> OP's
>> >> >> >>> issue had to do with language coverage.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Tom
>> >> >> >>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
>> >> >> >>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
>> >> >> >>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data 
>> >> >> >>> >> has
>> >> >> >>> >> nothing
>> >> >> >>> >> to
>> >> >> >>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs
>> >> >> >>> >> present.
>> >> >> >>> >> Those
>> >> >> >>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is 
>> >> >> >>> >> no
>> >> >> >>> >> technical
>> >> >> >>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. 
>> >> >> >>> >> It
>> >> >> >>> >> is
>> >> >> >>> >> my
>> >> >> >>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by
>> >> >> >>> >> little
>> >> >> >>> >> more
>> >> >> >>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No
>> >> >> >>> >> doubt
>> >> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >> >>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts 
>> >> >> >>> >> in
>> >> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >> >>> >> format.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Tom
>> >> >> >>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing
>> >> >> >>> > more
>> >> >> >>> > than
>> >> >> >>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as 
>> >> >> >>> > OT
>> >> >> >>> > instead of
>> >> >> >>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph 
>> >> >> >>> > set
>> >> >> >>> > than
>> >> >> >>> > T1
>> >> >> >>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat
>> >> >> >>> > limited
>> >> >> >>> > sample.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a
>> >> >> >>> > couple
>> >> >> >>> > of
>> >> >> >>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type 
>> >> >> >>> > features
>> >> >> >>> > of
>> >> >> >>> > anything available.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language
>> >> >> >>> > coverage,
>> >> >> >>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic
>> >> >> >>> > support,
>> >> >> >>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive
>> >> >> >>> > glyph
>> >> >> >>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >  - Character
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>

PS (the writing, not the font format :-))

In the interest of accuracy, I should point out that the incident I referred 
to actually occurred. It involved Grace Brewster Hooper (born Murray), later 
Rear Admiral Grace Hooper, Ph D and a principal author of the computer 
language called COBOL.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper

However, the term was in use for failure-caused errors before that and its 
origin seems lost in obscurity.

Tom

"Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message 
news:0D612E7E-0DCA-4255-B286-8D4952FF0851@microsoft.com...
> Thank you Tom,
>
> I will consult with the Managers to follow your advice for looking for Gil
> Sans - OpenType . I am not a big font specialist, could you advice me with
> stipulation of the request for improving the company font, Please!
>
> I mean how to formulate them the request 'To buy Gill Sans Cyr Open Type 
> or
> Trough type ' or..... however is called ???!?? but not PostScript . Help 
> me
> please.
>
> P.S. This historical explanation of the "bug" was funny!!
> -- 
> Dimitar Gyoshev
>
>
> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>
>> I hope it works for you.
>>
>> I am not sure that what you are seeing is a "bug" in the strict sense. As 
>> I
>> understand the term, a "bug" is a fault or flaw in the system that 
>> results
>> in improper operation. Historically, the original "bug" was literally 
>> that.
>> A moth had somehow gotten squashed between the electrical contacts of a
>> relay in an main-frame computer and cause a malfunction. Thus, there was 
>> a
>> "bug" that caused an error. The term stuck. In this case, I suspect the
>> system is operating as intended. However, there is at least one 
>> consequence
>> of that operation-as-designed of the font substitution system, it gives 
>> an
>> intended result, the font is substituted according to the rule set; 
>> however,
>> you see a failure to render the Cyrillic glyphs properly. So, 
>> technically,
>> there is not a "bug" but an unsuitable intended result.
>>
>> But, in a sense, this is hair-splitting. The result is not what you need 
>> or
>> want.
>>
>> I would suggest contacting Monotype and seek their advice on changing 
>> your
>> corporate font to one that has the look and feel you want and whose files
>> will work with Office 2007 and the operating system possibly an Open Type
>> Gill Sans.
>>
>> All the best.
>>
>> Tom
>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>>
>> "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
>> news:3C25A536-33D1-4502-AD46-36333EA3FB93@microsoft.com...
>> > Tom,
>> >
>> > Thank you for the attention and advices.
>> > On this way to convert the fonts I will find solution ( probably),
>> > BUT ANY HOW THIS IS A BUG IN THE MsOffice 2007 as many others and the 
>> > hope
>> > that Ms will repare it is left!
>> >
>> > Wish you all the best and Merry Christmas!
>> >
>> > -- 
>> > Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >
>> >
>> > "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >
>> >> One reply from my query was
>> >> "My guess is that there something about the font that doesn’t meet the
>> >> spec – could be code page or Unicode range bits not being properly 
>> >> set."
>> >>
>> >> On that issue, contact Monotype.
>> >>
>> >> Check FontLab website for a converter.
>> >> http://www.fontlab.com/
>> >>
>> >> Check your computer for any variety of Gill Sans in Truetype format. 
>> >> E.g.
>> >> some Microsoft products ship with one on the CD or DVD and will 
>> >> install
>> >> it.
>> >> That version does _not_ have Cyrillic glyphs and if it is being
>> >> substituted
>> >> for the MT PostScript font, you would get the result you experience.
>> >>
>> >> Tom
>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >>
>> >> "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
>> >> news:B0008063-571E-4938-9F9F-CEF03658A55C@microsoft.com...
>> >> > Thank you Tom ,
>> >> >
>> >> > But I haven't TrueType version of Gill Sans Cyr MT font.
>> >> > Could you advice me with the name of the best software for convert 
>> >> > from
>> >> > Postscript to TrueType version ( if any is available),Please?
>> >> > -- 
>> >> > Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "Tom Ferguson"  wrote in message
>> >> >> news:%23tkEYCiMIHA.1184@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> >> >> > Check your font directories and see if you have a TrueType 
>> >> >> > version
>> >> >> > of
>> >> >> > Gill
>> >> >> > Sans installed as well as a PostScript version. If you do, copy 
>> >> >> > the
>> >> >> > TrueType version to a different folder in order to back up the 
>> >> >> > files
>> >> >> > and
>> >> >> > then delete the TrueType files
>> >> >>
>> >> >> +++from the font folder+++
>> >> >>
>> >> >> .. Restart the computer. Test to see if the problem
>> >> >> > remains.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Tom
>> >> >> > MSMVP 19989-2007
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > "Dimitar Gyoshev"  wrote in message
>> >> >> > news:5B23A1D1-33A5-437C-9B33-61A562DFA5A2@microsoft.com...
>> >> >> >> Gentlemen,
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Your discussion is very interesting but you whent in another
>> >> >> >> directory
>> >> >> >> too
>> >> >> >> far away from my question!
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Just for clarification my simple question is over the Office 
>> >> >> >> 2007
>> >> >> >> and
>> >> >> >> usage
>> >> >> >> of PostScript font Gill Sans Cyr MT.
>> >> >> >> 1. This is our Company font !
>> >> >> >> 2. This font allready worked under Office 2003 !
>> >> >> >> 3. Cirllic is available in this font !
>> >> >> >> 4. I will repeit the question  again
>> >> >> >> " When I type in English this font is appear correctly ( means 
>> >> >> >> no
>> >> >> >> problems)
>> >> >> >> but when I switch to Cyrillic alphabet the font automatically
>> >> >> >> changes
>> >> >> >> to
>> >> >> >> Times New Roman with Cirillic letters (only Cyrillic part I 
>> >> >> >> mean) .
>> >> >> >> When
>> >> >> >> I
>> >> >> >> want to format it , selecting the text , pointing the request 
>> >> >> >> font
>> >> >> >> Gill
>> >> >> >> Sans
>> >> >> >> Cyr MT  In the roll own menu "Change the Font face" window -
>> >> >> >> nothing
>> >> >> >> happened
>> >> >> >> . The font stay 'Times New..'.! Only using 'Format Painter' 
>> >> >> >> solve
>> >> >> >> my
>> >> >> >> problem
>> >> >> >> (taking the format from Latin (English) part.),BUT THIS IS NOT 
>> >> >> >> THE
>> >> >> >> BEST
>> >> >> >> SOLUTION .When I used Office 2003 every think worked 
>> >> >> >> perfectly!!! ,
>> >> >> >> now
>> >> >> >> with
>> >> >> >> 2007 doesn't. The same problem occur on my college's PC ( the 
>> >> >> >> same
>> >> >> >> installation) .
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> This is the question not what is the different betwin TT and PS
>> >> >> >> fonts!
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> -- 
>> >> >> >> Dimitar Gyoshev
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> "Tom Ferguson" wrote:
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >>> I agree that Microsoft has placed greater emphasis on
>> >> >> >>> cross-language
>> >> >> >>> support
>> >> >> >>> as opposed to typographic niceties such as those you mention.
>> >> >> >>> Indeed,
>> >> >> >>> in
>> >> >> >>> various conversations with folks in the MS typography 
>> >> >> >>> department,
>> >> >> >>> I
>> >> >> >>> have
>> >> >> >>> urged more attention to that for whatever small influence I 
>> >> >> >>> might
>> >> >> >>> have.
>> >> >> >>> And,
>> >> >> >>> of course, my opinion is based on my experience which, like 
>> >> >> >>> yours
>> >> >> >>> and
>> >> >> >>> anybody else's, is limited by definition. ;-) But do recall 
>> >> >> >>> that
>> >> >> >>> the
>> >> >> >>> OP's
>> >> >> >>> issue had to do with language coverage.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> However, you make fair observation/comment.
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> Tom
>> >> >> >>> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>> "Character" <Char@cters.old.style> wrote in message
>> >> >> >>> news:rA03j.138589$Eg2.102934@fe06.news.easynews.com...
>> >> >> >>> > Tom Ferguson wrote:
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >> The preference I have for those with TT data -vs- PS data 
>> >> >> >>> >> has
>> >> >> >>> >> nothing
>> >> >> >>> >> to
>> >> >> >>> >> do with the quality of the data but with the set of glyphs
>> >> >> >>> >> present.
>> >> >> >>> >> Those
>> >> >> >>> >> with TT data tend to have better language coverage. There is 
>> >> >> >>> >> no
>> >> >> >>> >> technical
>> >> >> >>> >> reason why that should be so, it is just the present state. 
>> >> >> >>> >> It
>> >> >> >>> >> is
>> >> >> >>> >> my
>> >> >> >>> >> impression that the OT fonts with PS data were produced by
>> >> >> >>> >> little
>> >> >> >>> >> more
>> >> >> >>> >> than placing a wrapper around the PS font, so to speak. No
>> >> >> >>> >> doubt
>> >> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >> >>> >> will change as various foundries issue updates and new fonts 
>> >> >> >>> >> in
>> >> >> >>> >> that
>> >> >> >>> >> format.
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >> Tom
>> >> >> >>> >> MSMVP 1998-2007
>> >> >> >>> >>
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Yes, some OT font files that are floating around are nothing
>> >> >> >>> > more
>> >> >> >>> > than
>> >> >> >>> > someone (including the original foundry) simply saving it as 
>> >> >> >>> > OT
>> >> >> >>> > instead of
>> >> >> >>> > TT or PS. Because TT fonts could already have a larger glyph 
>> >> >> >>> > set
>> >> >> >>> > than
>> >> >> >>> > T1
>> >> >> >>> > fonts, those sets are carried forward.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > But I think that you're basing your comments on a somewhat
>> >> >> >>> > limited
>> >> >> >>> > sample.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > In particular, the all-new Adobe Pro series, now out for a
>> >> >> >>> > couple
>> >> >> >>> > of
>> >> >> >>> > years, have the most extensive glyph sets and open type 
>> >> >> >>> > features
>> >> >> >>> > of
>> >> >> >>> > anything available.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> > Microsoft's TT-based OT fonts appear to have broader language
>> >> >> >>> > coverage,
>> >> >> >>> > while Adobe's PS-based OT fonts have much greater typographic
>> >> >> >>> > support,
>> >> >> >>> > with alternate glyphs, extended ligatures, position-sensitive
>> >> >> >>> > glyph
>> >> >> >>> > selection, old-style figures, small caps, etc.
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>> >  - Character
>> >> >> >>> >
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >>>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>>