[Tex/LaTex] PDF/A with Linux Libertine und Linux Biolinum using pdfLaTeX

fontsluatexpdftexpdfxsymbols

I'd like to produce a PDF/A-1b compliant document. To validate it, I installed veraPDF.

There are several really good answers about producing PDF/A, see here:
https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/349521/4736 and https://tex.stackexchange.com/a/295137/4736 by @Leonid.

EDIT:

I can produce a validated, PDF/A-1B conform PDF using the LuaLaTeX engine, see the example at the end of this question. But I'd like to stick to pdfTeX for the time being, because it is a lot faster than LuaLaTeX.

I produced a pdf file based on the MWE printed below using pdfLaTeX.

The validation tells me, there are two kinds of issues with the PDF, I'm copying from the validation report:

Rule Status
Specification: ISO 19005-1:2005, Clause: 6.3.6, Test number: 1
For every font embedded in a conforming file and used for rendering, the glyph width information in the font dictionary and in the embedded font program shall be consistent. Failed
6 occurrences Hide
Glyph
renderingMode == 3 || isWidthConsistent == null || isWidthConsistent == true

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0 obj PDContentStream)/operators[11]/usedGlyphs3(FVQJUG+LinBiolinumB 115 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0 obj PDContentStream)/operators[31]/usedGlyphs2(YKWZWP+LinBiolinum 110 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0 obj PDContentStream)/operators[31]/usedGlyphs[5](YKWZWP+LinBiolinum 111 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0 obj PDContentStream)/operators[34]/usedGlyphs1(WJGWGZ+LinBiolinumI 117 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0 obj PDContentStream)/operators[19]/usedGlyphs[6](JSDWAF+LinLibertineI 99 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0 obj PDContentStream)/operators[34]/usedGlyphs[0](WJGWGZ+LinBiolinumI 97 0)

Specification: ISO 19005-1:2005, Clause: 6.3.5, Test number: 1
Embedded font programs shall define all font glyphs referenced for
rendering with conforming file. Failed 6 occurrences
Hide Glyph
renderingMode == 3 || isGlyphPresent == null || isGlyphPresent ==
true
root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0
obj PDContentStream)/operators[11]/usedGlyphs3(FVQJUG+LinBiolinumB
115 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0
obj PDContentStream)/operators[19]/usedGlyphs[6](JSDWAF+LinLibertineI
99 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0
obj PDContentStream)/operators[34]/usedGlyphs1(WJGWGZ+LinBiolinumI
117 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0
obj PDContentStream)/operators[31]/usedGlyphs2(YKWZWP+LinBiolinum
110 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0
obj PDContentStream)/operators[31]/usedGlyphs[5](YKWZWP+LinBiolinum
111 0)

root/document[0]/pages[0](7 0 obj PDPage)/contentStream[0](10 0
obj PDContentStream)/operators[34]/usedGlyphs[0](WJGWGZ+LinBiolinumI
97 0)

How can I find out, which glyphs the validation refers to? Which glyph is »LinBiolinumI 97 0«?

Here my (stolen — steal proudly!) MWE for pdfLaTeX:

\documentclass[ngerman]{scrartcl}
\pdfminorversion 4
\pdfcompresslevel=0
\immediate\pdfobj stream attr{/N 4} file{coated_FOGRA39L_argl.icc}
\pdfcatalog{%
/OutputIntents [ <<
/Type /OutputIntent
/S/GTS_PDFA1
/DestOutputProfile \the\pdflastobj\space 0 R
/OutputConditionIdentifier (Coated FOGRA39)
/Info(FOGRA39L)
>> ]
}
\usepackage[cmyk]{xcolor}
\usepackage{hyperxmp}
\usepackage[pdftex, pdfa]{hyperref}
\hypersetup{%
  colorlinks = true,
    pdfauthor          = {a},
    pdfkeywords        = {a, b, c},
    pdflang            = {en},
    pdftitle           = {a},
    pdfsubject         = {a},
  pdfcaptionwriter   = {a},
  pdfcontactaddress  = {a},
  pdfcontactcity     = {a},
  pdfcontactcountry  = {a},
  pdfcontactemail    = {a},
  pdfcopyright       = {a},
  pdfmetalang        = {en},
}

\makeatletter
% Dirty hack of hyperref to make rgb-like links annotated with C mark become annotated with K mark to work in PDF/A with CMYK
% makeatletter - makeatother needed
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\patchcmd{\hyper@linkfile}{/C[}{/K[}{}{}
\patchcmd{\hyper@linkurl}{/C[}{/K[}{}{}
\patchcmd{\find@pdflink}{/C[}{/K[}{}{}
\patchcmd{\hyper@linkstart}{/C[}{/K[}{}{}
\makeatother

\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{libertine}
\begin{document}
\section{Erster Abschnitt}
\label{CLA:erster-abschnitt}

Ein Text mit \emph{Auszeichnung} und sogar \textbf{fettem} Text, sogar {\sffamily{}
  LinBiolium als Schrift \emph{auch noch hervorgehoben}}. 


\end{document}

I found a discussion with similiar topic in a German forum, but the question has not been answered there.

And by the way: if I use the pdfx package, I get more or less the same validation issues, but unfortunately plus an issue with color.

EDIT

Thanks to a comment I tested succesfully using the LuaLaTeX engine. The following example led to a validated PDF/A-1B pdf:

\RequirePackage{luatex85}
\documentclass[ngerman]{scrartcl}
\pdfminorversion 4
\pdfcompresslevel=0
\immediate\pdfobj stream attr{/N 4} file{coated_FOGRA39L_argl.icc}
\pdfcatalog{%
/OutputIntents [ <<
/Type /OutputIntent
/S/GTS_PDFA1
/DestOutputProfile \the\pdflastobj\space 0 R
/OutputConditionIdentifier (Coated FOGRA39)
/Info(FOGRA39L)
>> ]
}
\usepackage[cmyk]{xcolor}
\usepackage{etoolbox}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\setmainfont{Linux Libertine O}
\setsansfont{Linux Biolinum O}
% % \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
% % \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
% \usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{libertine}
\usepackage{hyperxmp}
\usepackage[pdftex, pdfa]{hyperref}
\hypersetup{%
  colorlinks = true,
    pdfauthor          = {a},
    pdfkeywords        = {a, b, c},
    pdflang            = {en},
    pdftitle           = {a},
    pdfsubject         = {a},
  pdfcaptionwriter   = {a},
  pdfcontactaddress  = {a},
  pdfcontactcity     = {a},
  pdfcontactcountry  = {a},
  pdfcontactemail    = {a},
  pdfcopyright       = {a},
  pdfmetalang        = {en},
}

\makeatletter
% Dirty hack of hyperref to make rgb-like links annotated with C mark become annotated with K mark to work in PDF/A with CMYK
% makeatletter - makeatother needed

\patchcmd{\hyper@linkfile}{/C[}{/K[}{}{}
\patchcmd{\hyper@linkurl}{/C[}{/K[}{}{}
\patchcmd{\find@pdflink}{/C[}{/K[}{}{}
\patchcmd{\hyper@linkstart}{/C[}{/K[}{}{}
\makeatother


\begin{document}
\section{Erster Abschnitt}
\label{CLA:erster-abschnitt}

Ein Text mit \emph{Auszeichnung} und sogar \textbf{fettem} Text, sogar {\sffamily{}
  LinBiolium als Schrift \emph{auch noch hervorgehoben}}. 


\end{document}

Which is usefull, but I'd really appreciate a solution for pdfLaTeX!

Best Answer

The following example led to a validated PDF/A-1B pdf […] Which is usefull, but I'd really appreciate a solution for pdfLaTeX!

I allowed myself to remove some stuff that was not related to the problem. This example works well in pdftex 3.14159265-2.6-1.40.21 and validates in Preflight and VeraPDF 1.14.8:

%\pdfobjcompresslevel=0 %uncomment for Texlive
\documentclass[ngerman]{scrartcl}

\usepackage{hyperxmp}[2020/03/01]
\usepackage[pdftex, pdfa]{hyperref}

\makeatletter
%Create an OutputIntent in order to correctly specify colours
\immediate\pdfobj stream attr{/N 3} file{sRGB.icc}
\edef\iccobj{\the\pdflastobj}
\pdfcatalog{%
  /OutputIntents [
    <<
      /Type /OutputIntent
      /S /GTS_PDFA1
      /DestOutputProfile \iccobj\space 0 R
      /OutputConditionIdentifier (sRGB)
      /Info (sRGB)
    >>
  ]
}
\makeatother

\hypersetup{%
    pdftitle={b},
    pdfauthor={a},
    pdflang=de,
    %keeppdfinfo=1, %uncomment for PDF/A-1
    pdfapart=2, %set to 1 for PDF/A-1
    pdfaconformance=B
}

\usepackage{babel}
\usepackage{libertine}

\begin{document}

\section{Erster Abschnitt}
\label{CLA:erster-abschnitt}

Ein Text mit \emph{Auszeichnung} und sogar \textbf{fettem} Text, sogar {\sffamily{}
  LinBiolium als Schrift \emph{auch noch hervorgehoben}}. 

\end{document}

I ran into one problem: After installing Biolinum I had to refresh the font map files in user (not administrator) mode.

Related Solutions

[Tex/LaTex] What free math font could/should accompany Linux Libertine and Linux Biolinum

A good guide on what factors to consider when mixing fonts is Thierry Bouche's Diversity in math fonts article in TUGboat, Volume 19 (1998), No. 2.

The most important aspect is to use the same font for text and math letters (as well as letter-like symbols as \partial or \infty). This has drawbacks as some letters will suffer from spacing problems, but compared to the other option (using totally different math letters), it's really a lesser evil. Of course, if this is not acceptable to you, then you should first choose the math font and then use the same font for text, but that limits your font choices dramatically.

Once you've assigned the text font to the math letters, the remaining choices you face is for the geometric symbols, the delimiters and the big operators (\sum, \int, \bigcup etc.). The main consideration is color (how bold the symbols are) and the shape of the symbols (mainly the shape of sum or integral symbols, especially if you use them often). Compared to Libertine, XITS and Asana are a bit too bold (especially true for the sum symbol), Latin Modern is a bit too light (especially +, \otimes, etc.), and Cambria has a very huge \sum symbol, huge \otimes and \oplus as well as very bold \bigcup. Thus, which font will look better will depend on what type of math you're typing, and none will be perfect.

Here's a sample to show the results of this font mixing with Libertine. Notice the spacing problems around the f in f(r_k) and \Sigma_c f(r) due to the fact that's it's a text font we're using for math. I've not set all letter-like symbols to come from Libertine (only \infty), so there's still room for improvement. (Note also the missing parenthesis in one of the formulas with Latin Modern Math.)

libertine with different math fonts

\documentclass{article}

\usepackage{amsmath}

\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{unicode-math}

\setmainfont{Linux Libertine O}

\newcommand{\setlibertinemath}{%
% use Libertine for the letters
\setmathfont[range=\mathit/{latin,Latin,num,Greek,greek}]{Linux Libertine O Italic}
\setmathfont[range=\mathup/{latin,Latin,num,Greek,greek}]{Linux Libertine O}
\setmathfont[range=\mathbfup/{latin,Latin,num,Greek,greek}]{Linux Libertine O Bold}
%\setmathfont[range={"2202}]{Linux Libertine O}% "02202 = \partial % doesn't work
\setmathfont[range={"221E}]{Linux Libertine O}% "0221E = \infty
% etc. (list should be completed depending on needs)
}

\newcommand{\sample}{%
When computing the sums $\sum_{k=0}^{+\infty}{f(r_k)}$ of $f$ the integral representation of $K_0(x)$ may be used.
\[
  \eta(r)\frac{\partial f}{\partial r} + 2\Sigma_cf(r)
    = \sum_{k=0}^{+\infty}{K_0\mathopen{}\left(\frac{\lvert r - r_k \rvert}{L}\right)} 
    = \int_{0}^{\infty}{e^{-\left(z+\frac{r^2}{4L^2\pi}\right)} \frac{dz}{2z}}.
\]
We then use
\[
  \bigcup_{\lambda \in \Lambda}{U_\lambda} \cap  \bigsqcup_{\delta > 0}{G_\delta} = \bigcap_{i \in I}{\mathbf{A}_i}
  \quad \text{so that} \quad 
  u \otimes w \oplus v = 0.
\]
}

\pagestyle{empty}

\begin{document}

\section{Libertine + Latin Modern}
\setmathfont{Latin Modern Math}\setlibertinemath
\sample

\section{Libertine + Cambria}
\setmathfont{Cambria Math}\setlibertinemath
\sample

\section{Libertine + XITS}
\setmathfont{XITS Math}\setlibertinemath
\sample

\section{Libertine + Asana}
\setmathfont{Asana Math}\setlibertinemath
\sample

\end{document}

[Tex/LaTex] Linux Biolinum O messes up moderncv Package

Here's a more minimal example. The problem is that LuaTeX and XeTeX use different methods for finding fonts, and as a result, LuaTeX is finding the version of the font which is in /usr/local/texlive/2011/texmf-dist/fonts/opentype/public/libertine/ while XeLaTeX is finding the font in /Library/Fonts. If we load the font using its actual filename (which is possible with LuaTeX) the correct behaviour can be seen depending on the name of the font:

Given that the version in TeXLive is newer than the one (that I have) in /Library/Fonts/, it seems that the newer font is the one with the incorrect behaviour.

% !TEX TS-program = LuaLaTeX


\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\begin{document}    
\fontspec{LinBiolinum_Re-0.6.4}
Biolinum in \texttt{/Library/Fonts}

\rule{1in}{1ex}
\rule{1in}{4.5pt}

\fontspec{LinBiolinum_R}
Biolinum in \texttt{/usr/local/texlive/2011/texmf-dist/fonts/opentype/public/libertine/}

\rule{1in}{1ex}
\rule{1in}{4.5pt}
\end{document}

output of code

Best Answer

Related Solutions

[Tex/LaTex] What free math font could/should accompany Linux Libertine and Linux Biolinum

[Tex/LaTex] Linux Biolinum O messes up moderncv Package

Related Question