FWJ wrote:Soon, I hope. Maybe a few months? I wish I could give you a better answer.
Any more movement on this?Windows XP has been discontinued for a while now, so why not leave the current version as it is for Windows XP - and those who wish to continue to use legacy 8-bit fonts - and make a seperate version for Unicode and Windows Vista / 7? This would avoid any problems associated with having to support Unicode and ANSI fonts in one version.FWJ wrote:I realize you only asked a simple question (a good one) but perhaps it will be useful if I explain further.
I am working on the conversion every day and have been for several months.
I have all the basics working including Unicode Copy/Paste and RTF Import.
I works pretty well on Win2K/XP/Vista, and the BO Tibetan (PRC) keyboard works on Vista.
However, there are several difficult issues to solve.
The problem is that I am trying to create a version that supports Unicode and also continues to provide support for ANSI fonts *exactly* like the current version. This is proving VERY difficult. Mostly because I want it to work correctly for any user without requiring some special system configuration.
On Windows Vista and Windows 7 there is of course no need to update or distribute the Uniscribe DLL.FWJ wrote:The standard way to display Unicode on a Windows system is with Microsoft's Uniscribe DLL (usp10.dll). Uniscribe helps a program display Unicode fonts and is very important for fonts that are considered "complex script". Unicode Tibetan is considered "complex script" and Uniscribe is able to do a good job of displaying it.
The problem is that once Uniscribe is enabled, the system code that displays older ANSI fonts starts to fail in strange ways. Even worse, the failures are dependent on what has been installed on the system. It depends on which version of the Uniscribe DLL is available on the system. As an example, about 20 characters in the TibetanMachine typeface are no longer displayed if you use certain Uniscribe versions; but do appear with other versions. Even if I find a Uniscribe version that mostly works I can't distribute it because Microsoft does not allow that.
The major difficulty you describe seems to be trying to support legacy ANSI Tibetan fonts (some of which never properly conformed to the TrueType specification in the first place) and Unicode compatible Tibetan fonts in the same application. If this is not feasible - would it be possible to make a Unicode only version targeted at recent versions of Windows?
It sure would be nice to see a version of PechaMaker that works with Unicode fonts.FWJ wrote:The task for now is to try many ways to work around these issues.
with all good wishes
- Chris
Statistics:Posted by cfynn — Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:00 am
]]>
jeffchwu wrote:Hi, Cfynn,
Yes, copy that DLL into local directory is good method. But I just try to think the way as the FWJ's, it maybe possible that somebody ask FWJ "Why my MS word can show this well, but Pechamaker cannot!". Then just find that, the MS update the DLL, but PechaMake not update it to local directory.
In order to avoid that problem, 1) just use MS's system DLL, do not copy to local, or 2) check the dll update? if update the copy to local (manual or auto?) or..... 3) update by user.. <-- this way, FWJ do not like it.
^_- But that's all FWJ's choice, I just pray for it come true.
ཨོཾ་མ་ནི་པདྨེ་ཧཱུྃ།
Unfortunately MS do not update USP10.DLL even in the latest service pack for XP - so on XP systems if you want support for Unicode Tibetan script outside of MS Office you have to update it yourself ~ either by installing an updated version in the \WINDOWS\System32\ directory, which can be quite awkward to do due to the built-in protection for system DLLs; or by installing a copy of the updated USP10.DLL in the start-up directory of each application where you need Tibetan script support. Yes, copy that DLL into local directory is good method. But I just try to think the way as the FWJ's, it maybe possible that somebody ask FWJ "Why my MS word can show this well, but Pechamaker cannot!". Then just find that, the MS update the DLL, but PechaMake not update it to local directory.
In order to avoid that problem, 1) just use MS's system DLL, do not copy to local, or 2) check the dll update? if update the copy to local (manual or auto?) or..... 3) update by user.. <-- this way, FWJ do not like it.
^_- But that's all FWJ's choice, I just pray for it come true.
ཨོཾ་མ་ནི་པདྨེ་ཧཱུྃ།
If Office 2003 or above is installed on a system the USP10.DLL can be copied from there - if not, another legitimate way to get an updated USP10.DLL is to download and install Microsoft's free Word Viewer application.
Perhaps a way round this is for the PechaMaker install program to look for an Office installation and copy the DLL from there - if Office is not installed there might be be an option to dowload and install WordViewer which would provide the same. (You also get an updated version of USP10.DLL when you install Google Earth). In my experience this does not interfere with properly made "ANSI" fonts.
The only other practical way I can see round this would be for PechaMaker to use an alternate to USP10.DLL such as provided by ICU, Pango or HarfBuzz. Inkscape does this and works well with Tibetan script Unicode fonts - but I suspect this would involve major changes to the Pecha Maker code.
Of course on Vista and Windows 7 systems this USP10.DLL business is not an issue - but in India, Bhutan and Nepal most people are still using XP systems. Of course nearly every one of these systems also has Word 2003 or 2007 installed so a version of USP10.DLL with Tibetan script support is almost always available on the system and could be used.
with all good wishes
- Chris
Statistics:Posted by cfynn — Thu Sep 03, 2009 5:55 am
]]>
FWJ wrote: I have just returned from India/Nepal where I visited a half dozen Monasteries, the LTWA and TCRC and other Tibetan publishing organizations. I found that PechaMaker is appreciated and well received. However, I did not find a single Tibetan who was actually using Unicode for any project or document. Only about 3% of the computers available were running Vista.
Isn't this a bit of a "chicken and egg" situation? As long as it is difficult for people to format pecha using Unicode fonts then people will continue to use legacy systems that they are more familiar with where automatic formatting is available. Once there is a way to format pecha easily using Unicode fonts then people will begin to migrate. In 2006-2007 we input the whole 12 volumes of Padma Lingpa's Ter Chö in Unicode here in Bhutan - and formatted it all as pecha using simple manusl (non-automated) templates in Word on windows XP. This works but it is certainly not as convenient as Pecha Maker.
I don't know about India, but the Loden Foundation now also has a project here in Bhutan inputting texts using Unicode and there are several individuals here doing the same. There is also now an Electronic Kangyur Project in Tibet which is inputting the whole of the Kangyur in Unicode. ~ a Unicode compatible version of Pecha Maker would certainly be useful for formatting the data from these projects and others - so I hope you will keep working on this.
The government and most other institutions in Bhutan now almost exclusively use Unicode (on Windows XP systems) - so it is certainly not the case that there is no one using Unicode for documents written in Tibetan script. Earlier this year I also found a way to make Unicode Tibetan script fonts work in Adobe's InDesign (CS2 & CS3) - so now Dzongkha language newspapers are published using Unicode fonts. It should be possible to make pecha templates or a plug-in for InDesign - but that professional publishing software is expensive and you need to be familair with it to use it properly.
with all good wishes
- Chris
Statistics:Posted by cfynn — Thu Sep 03, 2009 5:29 am
]]>
Yes, copy that DLL into local directory is good method. But I just try to think the way as the FWJ's, it maybe possible that somebody ask FWJ "Why my MS word can show this well, but Pechamaker cannot!". Then just find that, the MS update the DLL, but PechaMake not update it to local directory.
In order to avoid that problem, 1) just use MS's system DLL, do not copy to local, or 2) check the dll update? if update the copy to local (manual or auto?) or..... 3) update by user.. <-- this way, FWJ do not like it.
^_- But that's all FWJ's choice, I just pray for it come true.
ཨོཾ་མ་ནི་པདྨེ་ཧཱུྃ།
Statistics:Posted by jeffchwu — Fri Jul 17, 2009 4:49 pm
]]>
cfynn wrote:
If you install and updated USP10.DLL in a private program directory. such as the one PechaMaker is installed in. there is no problem -and a program starting from that directory will use that copy of the DLL rather than the one in the \Windows\System32\ directory. When looking for DLLs, Windows programs first look in the directory they start from and only if not found there, then it looks in the system directories and PATH.
(This allows Windows to use different versions of the same DLL for different programs.)
This is the reason Tibetan Unicode will often work in Office 2003 but not in other applications under Windows XP - Office is using a private copy of USP10.DLL (that has Tibetan support) which is installed in the Office program directory rather than the system wide copy (which has no Tibetan support) installed in \Windows\System32\ .
It is much more difficult to update the USP10.DLL in the \Windows\System32\ directory since Windows security features will usually replace the original (old) copy of the file over the newer one you install.
Copying an updated USP10.DLL into a program directory is the method Microsoft themselves recommend in similar situations.
- Chris
Dear Jeffjeffchwu wrote:Hi, Cfynn,
I think if possible, just use the DLL, do not copy. Due to that DLL will update by microsoft, it will not update to copyed-one.
B.R.
jeff
If you install and updated USP10.DLL in a private program directory. such as the one PechaMaker is installed in. there is no problem -and a program starting from that directory will use that copy of the DLL rather than the one in the \Windows\System32\ directory. When looking for DLLs, Windows programs first look in the directory they start from and only if not found there, then it looks in the system directories and PATH.
(This allows Windows to use different versions of the same DLL for different programs.)
This is the reason Tibetan Unicode will often work in Office 2003 but not in other applications under Windows XP - Office is using a private copy of USP10.DLL (that has Tibetan support) which is installed in the Office program directory rather than the system wide copy (which has no Tibetan support) installed in \Windows\System32\ .
It is much more difficult to update the USP10.DLL in the \Windows\System32\ directory since Windows security features will usually replace the original (old) copy of the file over the newer one you install.
Copying an updated USP10.DLL into a program directory is the method Microsoft themselves recommend in similar situations.
- Chris
Statistics:Posted by cfynn — Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:37 am
]]>
jeffchwu wrote:Hi, Cfynn,
I think if possible, just use the DLL, do not copy. Due to that DLL will update by microsoft, it will not update to copyed-one.
B.R.
jeff
Dear JeffI think if possible, just use the DLL, do not copy. Due to that DLL will update by microsoft, it will not update to copyed-one.
B.R.
jeff
If you install and updated USP10.DLL in a private program directory. such as the one PechaMaker is installed in. there is no problem -and a program starting from that directory will use that copy of the DLL rather than the one in the \Windows\System32\ directory. When looking for DLLs, Windows programs first look in the directory they start from and only then in the system directories and PATH.
This is why Tibetan Unicode will often work in Office 2003 but not in other applications under Windows XP - Office is using a private copy of USP10.DLL (that has Tibetan support) which is installed in the Office program directory rather than the system wide copy (which has no Tibetan support) installed in \Windows\System32\ .
It is much more difficult to update the USP10.DLL in the \Windows\System32\ directory since Windows security features will usually replace the original (old) copy of the file over the newer one you install.
- Chris
Statistics:Posted by cfynn — Fri Jul 17, 2009 10:22 am
]]>
I think if possible, just use the DLL, do not copy. Due to that DLL will update by microsoft, it will not update to copyed-one.
B.R.
jeff
Statistics:Posted by jeffchwu — Fri Jul 17, 2009 9:24 am
]]>
1. user is using Windows Vista or Windows 7
2. user has MS Office 2003 SP 2 or above installed
3. user has Miicrosoft's free Word Viewer installed
4. user has manually updsated usp10.dll in Windows\System32
Could the PM installer look for a version of Uniscribe supporting Tibetan already on the users system and if available make a copy in the installation directory of PechaMaker (not necessary in case 1 & 4)
Office 2003 puts a copy of a private USP10.DLL in
\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\OFFICE11\
Office 2007 puts a copy of a private USP10.DLL in
\Program Files\Microsoft Office\Office12
so those are places the installer could look.
If there is no version of Uniscribe which supports Tibetan already on system, suggest user download and install free Word Viewer from MS site then run PM install program again.
The most recent version of WordView is available for download from: <http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en>
or: <http://tinyurl.com/MSWordView>
- Chris
Statistics:Posted by cfynn — Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:36 am
]]>
Hooo, I know it diffcult to let others know the issue, and help them to fix it.
Sorry, I just like to get a work-system first, then wait it become profect and profect.
Thanks your information, I will wait 3.x version.
I will pray for it @^__^@
Jeff
Statistics:Posted by jeffchwu — Wed Jul 08, 2009 1:25 pm
]]>
It seems that you are very comfortable with computers and you are able to do the extra things it would take to make Unicode work. You are pointing out the very steps it would take to make it work so I am sure you could do this. However this is not true for most users.
What I am trying to say is that I want to make PechaMaker work well for almost anyone. Users should not have to do more complex and unusual things to make it work correctly. What I mean by "Vista only" is that the only release I know how to make at this point would only work well on a Vista system.
Yes, 3.x does support both ANSI and Unicode. But it does not seem reasonable to offer a Unicode version when only the ANSI will work correctly for most users. If standard XP users try Unicode, many characters will look bad and they will not know why. How would they know they must switch to a Vista machine; and what if they do not have access to a Vista machine?
Statistics:Posted by FWJ — Tue Jul 07, 2009 9:21 am
]]>
Sorry, I do not know that issue about "for Vista only".
For new version PechaMaker, it still can dispaly ANSI font, right?
If it work for both Ansi and Unicode, the user can select which one he like. So if user cannot display Unicode font well, he have two choice.
1) Keep use Ansi document
2) Type the unicode document and make pecha on old system/machine, but print at new system/machine. Due to that's just display problem, I think that's good idea.
Hoo, the only issue is maybe it is different page/line no. in different system, so we cannot find the wrong word to correct to right word. But we can search very easy, right?
Best regards
Jeff
Statistics:Posted by jeffchwu — Thu Jul 02, 2009 12:25 pm
]]>
I appreciate your questions because I think other people are wondering about these things too.
I completely agree that changing to Unicode will make things much easier; for users and for programmers. Unicode is fantastically useful for handling Tibetan text (converting, indexing, searching, spelling, etc). These text manipulation problems are solved; but the display problem is not solved.
Many Unicode capable editors are already available so it is easy to enter Tibetan Unicode. But PM is all about display. If the displayed text looks bad then it is useless; and Microsoft has made it impossible to insure proper display on Windows systems.
To answer your question, yes, a user could control which usp10.dll file PM will use, just by placing placing it in the PM install directory. But all versions look bad except for one, and I can't help make sure that all users get that version. It is not acceptable to make users go find a copy on some other machine, or to crawl the web and make a risky download.
As you mention, the ANSI font situation was a real headache, and Unicode is a huge leap forward in simplifying things. But releasing Unicode PM now will not help simplify things further for anyone other than the latest Vista users. I'm not willing to release "for Vista only".
Statistics:Posted by FWJ — Wed Jul 01, 2009 8:13 pm
]]>
Thanks for your hard work first. ^_^
Sometimes, I get headache to change different font to different guy. Some people like this font, some body like that font.
And change the pecha to another font always make new problem. 
So that's why I hope Unicode can be come up early. If every font become to unicode. That's easy to change to each other.
BTW, put USP10.DLL inside the install maybe not a good idea, I agree with you. It just one easy way to make it work.
I do not know programing well! Is it possibel select local USP10.DLL or system with option on PechaMaker?? If could, it is easy let somebody try and error. (include debuging and try new version USP10.DLL)Sorry about to ask some many question with my poor English.
Jeff
Statistics:Posted by jeffchwu — Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:03 pm
]]>
That seems simple enough to say and to do; but mistakes can be made even with that.
My belief is that it is inappropriate to release without an installer that can take care of everything and assure good results for any user's system.
Some things I am thinking of:
- The whole point of creating a pecha is to look at it.
It is unacceptable to provide a solution that does not provide good looking Tibetan results for all users. - Most people are not likely to read detailed instructions; and the target user base does not necessarily read English well.
- At this point there is only one version of usp10.dll that I know of that actually works. Any other will give poor results.
- If someone did try to jam any usp10.dll version into their system32\ then some ANSI Tibetan fonts could stop working; in very subtle ways.
- And the problems with inexact installation are subtle.
For example, certain characters can just disappear, sometimes text looks fine on the screen but is blank when printing. - These things all depend on which OS and service pack you have installed.
I haven't given up, I am still looking at it.
Statistics:Posted by FWJ — Sun Jun 28, 2009 9:34 pm
]]>
Is it possible to put usp10.dll on pechamaker's work path and make it work with pechamaker? Compare to put it on system32, it easy to teach other guys to make it work!
Best regards
Jeff
Statistics:Posted by jeffchwu — Mon Jun 22, 2009 6:30 pm
]]>