Pyanepsion

No worries. I've actually been working on the Microsoft font license and I'm sure of myself. Not being able to export TrueType font collections is indeed a bug in the Affinity Suite. The gist is here: https://docs.microsoft.com/fr-fr/typography/fonts/font-faq You can find Angsana with Thai fonts. Download You will find all the fonts provided free of charge with Windows 10 from the Settings window by going to: - Applications/Optional Features/Selected Regional Policies; - Customization/Fonts/Download fonts for all languages; - Customization/Fonts/Get more fonts from Microsoft Store.

I'm afraid you're wrong about two things. The Microsoft TrueType font collections offered free with Windows 10 Pro are specifically editable says Microsoft. And the flag of all fonts is set to Editable. You can check it with the freeware (but then you get your money's worth, i.e. not much) Fontforges. Here is what two other specialized paid software give. PS. Digging a little deeper, I see that Word prints correctly also with Adobe PDF, but that Affinity mixes Normal, Italic, Bold and Mixed styles.

Hello, Kfriis. You may have found the reason for this bug of the Affinity suite. It is possible that Affinity’s PDF export may not correctly read the embedded licensing rights flag when it is a collection of TrueType fonts. It reads it well when it displays the font on a screen or when it prints it, including … printing in PDF with Microsoft Print to PDF. As with all the other free Microsoft fonts for Windows, Microsoft TrueType font collections are editable (read and write) and can be freely embedded in the data transmitted to the print media (in practice a PDF file). Note that the Microsoft Office suite (Word, etc.), QuarkXPress, and the Adobe suite (Indesign, etc.) create the PDF file correctly. It is understandable these manufacturers since almost all new fonts from the major foundries are now essentially TrueType collections. All TrueType font collections are affected by this bug of the suite Affinity, regardless of all the foundry. AngsanaUPC-printing-by-Microsoft-Print-to-PDF.pdf AngsanaUPC.afpub

Thanks Firtsdefence.

Hello, One of my authors writers works with a graphic designer working on the Adobe suite. His remark amazes me, and I would like to know what’s going on with the Affinity suite, and in particular with Affinity Designer using a graphical tablet. Here’s what he says to me: Well! Reproducing the effect of the pencil in vectorial is not exactly the subject of some extensions (either on Adobe or on Affinity)? Which ones? For my part, for DTP, I very much prefer to receive a vector image, because the drawing is then always very clear. What to say to him?

Spelling, typography, and their rules of use (grammar) vary considerably from one language to another. A language such as Turkish will clump words together, another such as Japanese will differentiate the meaning of words according to the context, and according to the person speaking and the person for whom it is intended. Etc. It is therefore becoming illusory to offer integrated support in the field of spelling, because only on a case-by-case basis, extensions made by professionals in the language in question really master their part. Incidentally, this also explains the commercial failure of Anglo-Saxon and German correction tools in countries such as France. A specific extension, however, means that the manufacturer of the main software, for example Microsoft, or Adobe, or Quark (what theyre doing), gives the necessary programming information so that the extension can bypass the default solution, here the use of Hunspell. Anyway! It is imperative that Affinity collaborates more on this point, so that the added value brought by such extensions does not remain the strong point of its competitors.

This is only possible if you always work with the same typographical rules and vocabulary options. Here's more exactly what I'd be looking to do. I often switch from one typographic setting to another and from one dictionary format to another in the same day and then start over with the same files the next day. The preparatory work is always carried out in Word and always indicates the language en-EN whatever the options of the 3 types of dictionaries. Originally, Word, LibreOffice, Quark XPress, Indesign, etc. did not allow you to change typographical, grammar, and spelling settings. There was only one factory choice, American. Manufacturers then created adapters to first integrate dictionaries of vocabularies in non-agglutinating languages, then came the dictionaries of typographic settings and then in the complex languages the dictionaries of grammars. That was 25 years ago. A lot of progress has been made since then, and the technique based on Hunspell is more like the old-fashioned one. You can even modify and add on-the-fly temporary activation dictionaries for each of the 3 categories, just the time of the work, for example when working on one version or another of the Bible, or on a specialized magazine… Then save these settings for later work. Grammalecte still relies on Hunspell technology, but it still allows to get the basics of these 3 types of settings on the fly, even though they are really far from the level of commercial extensions. This works on FireFox, Chrome, LibreOffice, OpenOffice, Thunderbird, Cli, SublimeText, Wim, Emac, Pluma, Sigil… https://grammalecte.net/#download I imagine that this should also be possible on Affinity?

Hello, 1. In many languages, there is a slightly old version of the spelling. For example, in France, the old handwriting now goes back a generation. The French dictionary therefore has 5 sub-dictionaries: Common, Modern, Classical, Reform, Appendix. Dictionary “Classic”: Common + Modern + Classic. Dictionary “Reform 1990”: Common + Reform. Dictionary “All variants”: Common + Modern + Classic + Reform + Annex. How to easily manage all these possibilities many times in the same day? 2. Typographical rules may vary from one publisher to another. How to easily manage all these possibilities?

I have the impression that the subject is far removed from the original question. It only consisted of knowing how to transform a text written in one language to put it in another language. Regarding the number of languages spoken in the world, the consensus seems to be around 6,900. (French version) https://www.canal-u.tv/video/cnrs_ups2259/combien_de_langues_sont_parlees_dans_le_monde.13034 Regarding dictionaries using the format used by Affinity, these are those used by Firefox. Run FireFox. https://addons.mozilla.org/fr/firefox/language-tools/ Save link target as. Unzip with 7Zip Place in the corresponding Affinity dictionary folder respecting the international format of the file name of the folder, example: fr-FR for the French language of France. For the variants of the French dictionary of France (current or old spelling), use the Hungspell link of Grammalecte. Avoid using the mixed version. https://grammalecte.net/download.php?prj=fr

Alfred, this morning, you are definitely mixing everything! We’re going to end up thinking that you’re feeling attacked yourself as soon as we explain incidentally, apart, the reason for a major mistake by Serif. Since you insist: Yes! Serif’s conception of what is a spelling check tool in French is obviously and clearly a mistake, and their refusal to help the 3 French-speaking companies (two French companies and one Canadian company) to make a real adapter (maybe to be a big money story?) is a major mistake.

Alfred, You're making a mix-up! Affinity's misconception is not about the absence or existence of dictionaries for different languages. No one has ever said that. It deals with the very concept of what a correctional aid tool is for a Francophone and not trusting the real Francophone correctional professionals.

This is obviously worse, because it may wrongly give the illusion that a new text is correct or wrong when it is not. French-speaking languages may have a strong similarity on some, but they also have a very strong difference between them, both in terms of vocabulary and typography. Failing to find the right dictionary in the right language, the right procedure is to be alerted rather than correcting or ignoring by mistake. The best strategy, by far, is to manually change the format of text of the Swiss, or Belgian, or Canadian, or Caribbean, or any other French-language version into a French of France version of text. Fiddling a fake Swiss, or Belgian, or Canadian or Caribbean dictionary, or any other French-language version would make people believe wrongly that the non-French text of France is good or bad. You can then use another DTP tool instead (Quark, Indesign, etc.). which uses real correction tools rather than an ersatz of like Grammalecte because the makers of Affinity have a misconception of spell checking due to their English-speaking culture and do not trust the real professionals of French correction tools ( what sufficiency!).

(Dictionary dedicated to the French language) Dictionnaire consacré à la langue française : https://grammalecte.net/

Thank you both.

Hello, Whether on the public version 1.8.3.641 or on the beta version 1.8.4.687, the prefight indicates that it can't find the fr-CH dictionary. The initial text was indeed written on the Swiss version of Word. How to tell it the text is rather in French and therefore that the dictionary should be fr-FR?