There's a number of issues with the fonts in the referenced PDF file. First of all, they contain broken `ToUnicode` data (`NUL` bytes all over the place). However even if you skip those, the `ToUnicode` data appears to contain nothing but a `IdentityH` CMap which won't help provide a proper glyph mapping.
The real issue actually turns out to be that the PDF file uses the "Calibri" font[1], but doesn't include any font files. Since that one isn't a standard font, and uses a fairly different CID to GID map compared to the standard fonts, we're not able to render the file even remotely correct.
To work around this, I'm thus proposing that we include a (incomplete) glyph map for Calibri, and fallback to the standard Helvetica font. Obviously this isn't going to look perfect, but it's really the best that we can hope to achieve given that the PDF file is missing the necessary font data.
Finally, please note that none of the PDF readers I've tried (Adobe Reader, PDFium in Chrome) were able to extract the text (which isn't very surprising, given the broken `ToUnicode` data).
Fixes 9195.
---
[1] According to Wikipedia, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calibri, Calibri is (primarily) a Windows font.
In some fonts, the included `ToUnicode` data is incomplete causing text-selection to not work properly. For simple fonts that contain encoding data, we can manually build a `ToUnicode` map to attempt to improve things.
Please note that since we're currently using the `ToUnicode` data during glyph mapping, in an attempt to avoid rendering regressions, I purposely didn't want to amend to original `ToUnicode` data for this text-selection edge-case.
Instead, I opted for the current solution, which will (hopefully) give slightly better text-extraction results in PDF file with incomplete `ToUnicode` data.
According to the PDF specification, see [section 9.10.2](http://www.adobe.com/content/dam/acom/en/devnet/acrobat/pdfs/PDF32000_2008.pdf#G8.1873172):
> A conforming reader can use these methods, in the priority given, to map a character code to a Unicode value.
> ...
Reading that paragraph literally, it doesn't seem too unreasonable to use *different* methods for different charcodes.
Fixes 8229.
In issue #8707, there's a char code mapped to a non-
existing glyph which shouldn't be drawn. However, we
saw it was missing and tried to then use the post table and
end up mapping it incorrectly.
This illuminated a problem with issue #5704 and bug
893730 where glyphs disappeared after above fix. This was
from the cmap returning the wrong glyph id. Which in turn was
caused because the font had multiple of the same type of cmap
table and we were choosing the last one. Now, we instead
default to the first one. I'm unsure if we should instead be
merging the multiple cmaps, but using only the first one works.
The initial issue with #8255 was I added a missing glyphs
check to adjustMapping, but this caused us to skip re-mapping
a glyph if the fontCharCode was a missingGlyph which in turn
caused us to overwrite a valid glyph id with an invalid one. While
fixing this, I also added a warning if the private use area is full since
this also accidentally happened when I made a different mistake.
This brought to light a number of issues where we map
missing glyphs to notdef, but often the notdef is actually defined
and then ends up being drawn. Now the glyphs don't get
mapped in toFontChar and so they are not drawn by the canvas.
Fixing the above brought up another issue though in bug1050040.pdf.
In this PDF, the font fails to load by the browser and before we were still
drawing the glyphs because it looked like the font had them, but with the fixes
above the glyphs showed up as missing so we didn't attempt draw them. To
fix this, I now throw an error when the loca table is in really bad shape and
we fall back to trying to use a system font. We now also use this fall back if
there are any format errors during converting fonts.
This replaces `assert` calls with `throw new FormatError()`/`throw new Error()`.
In a few places, throwing an `Error` (which is what `assert` meant) isn't correct since the enclosing function is supposed to return a `Promise`, hence some cases were changed to `Promise.reject(...)` and similarily for `createPromiseCapability` instances.
*As mentioned the last time that I touched this particular part of the font code, I'm sincerely hope that this doesn't cause any regressions!*
However, the patch passes all tests added in PRs 5770, 6270, and 7904 (and obviously all other tests as well). Furthermore, I've manually checked all the issues/bugs referenced in those PRs without finding any issues.
Fixes 8480.
Please note that the `glyphlist.js` and `unicode.js` files are converted to CommonJS modules instead, since Babel cannot handle files that large and they are thus excluded from transpilation.
Please see http://eslint.org/docs/rules/object-shorthand.
For the most part, these changes are of the search-and-replace kind, and the previously enabled `no-undef` rule should complement the tests in helping ensure that no stupid errors crept into to the patch.
This patch basically reverts one aspect of TrueType (3, 1) cmap parsing to the state prior to PR 4259. After that PR, a number of regressions occurred in this particular code-path, which necessitated a number of follow-ups such as PRs 5703, 5743, and 6425.
The empirical data suggests, at least to me, that we should always prefer a (3, 1) cmap for TrueType fonts when they have an encoding, regardless of the Symbolic font flag.
Obviously this patch passes all unit/font/reference tests locally, and I made sure that all the PRs mentioned above landed with test-cases included.
However, in my opinion, there's still a very real possibility that this patch could potentially cause new regressions.
Given that the PDF file in bug 1337429 has been broken for almost *three* years before anyone noticed, and considering that the code-path in question has been the source of numerous regressions, I do *not* intend to request uplift of this patch to previous Firefox versions (assuming that it's even accepted).
Fixes https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1337429.
See http://eslint.org/docs/rules/brace-style.
Having the opening/closing braces on the same line can often make the code slightly more difficult to read, in particular for `if`/`else if` statements, compared to using new lines.
This patch also, for consistency with `mozilla-central`, enables the [`no-iterator`](http://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-iterator) rule. Note that this rule didn't require a single code change.
Please see http://eslint.org/docs/rules/no-unused-vars; note that this patch purposely uses the same rule options as in `mozilla-central`, such that it fixes part of issue 7957.
It wasn't, in my opinion, entirely straightforward to enable this rule compared to the already existing rules. In many cases a `var descriptiveName = ...` format was used (more or less) to document the code, and I choose to place the old variable name in a trailing comment to not lose that information.
I welcome feedback on these changes, since it wasn't always entirely easy to know what changes made the most sense in every situation.
Please see http://eslint.org/docs/rules/spaced-comment.
Note that the exceptions added for `line` comments are intended to still allow use of the old preprocessor without linting errors.
Also, I took the opportunity to improve the grammar slightly (w.r.t. capitalization and punctuation) for comments touched in the patch.
Changing this particular code makes me somewhat nervous about regressions, since PR 5770 necessitated the follow-up PR 6270.
However, the patch passes all tests added in those PRs (and obviously all other tests). Furthermore, I've manually checked all the issues/bugs referenced in PRs 5770 and 6270 without finding any issues.
**Please note:** This patch fixes *only* the font bug, not the SVG conversion, present on pages two and three of the PDF file in issue 7901.
*Please note that most of the necessary code adjustments were made in PR 7890.*
ESLint has a number of advantageous properties, compared to JSHint. Among those are:
- The ability to find subtle bugs, thanks to more rules (e.g. PR 7881).
- Much more customizable in general, and many rules allow fine-tuned behaviour rather than the just the on/off rules in JSHint.
- Many more rules that can help developers avoid bugs, and a lot of rules that can be used to enforce a consistent coding style. The latter should be particularily useful for new contributors (and reduce the amount of stylistic review comments necessary).
- The ability to easily specify exactly what rules to use/not to use, as opposed to JSHint which has a default set. *Note:* in future JSHint version some of the rules we depend on will be removed, according to warnings in http://jshint.com/docs/options/, so we wouldn't be able to update without losing lint coverage.
- More easily disable one, or more, rules temporarily. In JSHint this requires using a numeric code, which isn't very user friendly, whereas in ESLint the rule name is simply used instead.
By default there's no rules enabled in ESLint, but there are some default rule sets available. However, to prevent linting failures if we update ESLint in the future, it seemed easier to just explicitly specify what rules we want.
Obviously this makes the ESLint config file somewhat bigger than the old JSHint config file, but given how rarely that one has been updated over the years I don't think that matters too much.
I've tried, to the best of my ability, to ensure that we enable the same rules for ESLint that we had for JSHint. Furthermore, I've also enabled a number of rules that seemed to make sense, both to catch possible errors *and* various style guide violations.
Despite the ESLint README claiming that it's slower that JSHint, https://github.com/eslint/eslint#how-does-eslint-performance-compare-to-jshint, locally this patch actually reduces the runtime for `gulp` lint (by approximately 20-25%).
A couple of stylistic rules that would have been nice to enable, but where our code currently differs to much to make it feasible:
- `comma-dangle`, controls trailing commas in Objects and Arrays (among others).
- `object-curly-spacing`, controls spacing inside of Objects.
- `spaced-comment`, used to enforce spaces after `//` and `/*. (This is made difficult by the fact that there's still some usage of the old preprocessor left.)
Rules that I indend to look into possibly enabling in follow-ups, if it seems to make sense: `no-else-return`, `no-lonely-if`, `brace-style` with the `allowSingleLine` parameter removed.
Useful links:
- http://eslint.org/docs/user-guide/configuring
- http://eslint.org/docs/rules/
This patch adds support for non-embedded Arial Black fonts, that use a `Arial-Black...` format for the font names.
Also, this patch changes `canvas.js` such that we always render Arial Black fonts with the maximum weight, which actually improves a number of existing test-cases. This should thus explain the test "failures", which are clear improvements compared with e.g. Adobe Reader.
Fixes 7835.
Note that in order to prevent any possible issues, this patch does *not* try to amend the `toUnicode` data for Type1 fonts that contain either `ToUnicode` or `Encoding` entries in the font dictionary.
Fixes, or at least improves, issues/bugs such as e.g. 6658, 6901, 7182, 7217, bug 917796, bug 1242142.
This patch is yet another instalment in the (never ending) series of patches for PDF files that specify completely incorrect Type/Subtype for its fonts. In this case Type1/Type1C, when in fact OpenType would have been correct.
Fixes 7598.
When adding new entries to `ProblematicCharRanges`, you have to be careful to not make any mistakes since that could cause glyph mapping issues.
Currently the existing reference tests should probably help catch any errors, but based on experience I think that having a unit-test which specifically checks `ProblematicCharRanges` would be both helpful and timesaving when modifying/reviewing changes to this code.
Hence this patch which adds a function (and unit-test) that is used to validate the entries in `ProblematicCharRanges`, and also checks that we don't accidentally add more character ranges than the Private Use Area can actually contain.
The way that the validation code, and thus the unit-test, is implemented also means that we have an easy way to tell how much of the Private Use Area is potentially utilized by re-mapped characters.
In the PDF file in the issue, some of the glyphs end up being mapped to the Lepcha Unicode block; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lepcha_(Unicode_block).
This didn't use to matter, but after HarfBuzz updates that improved support for Lepcha fonts, in particular https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1249861, some glyphs are now moved horizontally.
To avoid that, this patch adds the Lepcha block to the list of Unicode ranges that we skip when building the glyph mapping.
Fixes 7426.
