JP2000322048A - Outline font evaluation device and evaluation method - Google Patents

Abstract

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To evaluate automatically the quality of a designed outline font after being rasterized in various sizes. SOLUTION: A rasterizing device 3 generates a sample bit map font 7 generated by rasterizing an outline font 6 with an original mesh size, and an evaluation target bit font 8 generated by rasterizing the same outline font 6 with a size for an evaluation target. A control part 1 compares the sample bit map font 7 with the whole or a part of the evaluation target bit map font 8 in the same reduction scale, and expresses numerically the ratio of coincident bits and outputs it.

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0001]

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 1. Field of the Invention The present invention relates to an outline font evaluation apparatus and an evaluation method used for evaluating the quality of an outline font when designing the outline font.

[0002]

2. Description of the Related Art Outline fonts are font data for high-quality printing or display of characters and symbols.
Widely used in personal computers and word processors. This outline font is composed of a group of coordinate data representing the outline of a character or the like. When the character code and the character size are specified, the outline of the character according to the corresponding character size is reproduced using the corresponding coordinate data group, and the filling process is performed according to the outline, and the target bitmap is processed. Generate fonts. A printer driver in a personal computer or a rasterizer included in a control program in the printer executes this processing.

In the outline font rasterizing process, a coordinate data group indicating a contour of a character having a design size (referred to as an original mesh size) is enlarged or reduced by an arithmetic process, and bit map data of a target size is converted. For this reason, the outline of a character or the like may be rounded or omitted in the course of the arithmetic processing. Thus, the generated bitmap font may be of high quality at one size but degraded at another size. In the outline font design stage, the quality after rasterization is evaluated for all sizes of all characters, and the correction and addition of coordinate data and hint information for correcting the coordinate data are repeated. In this way, a certain level of quality is ensured for all sizes. Performing all of these tasks manually increases the development time for outline fonts. For this reason, for example, a technology has been developed that automatically determines whether or not there is occurrence of penetration or unnatural displacement of a place that should not be penetrated (Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 7-140).
957).

[0004]

However, the above-mentioned prior art has the following problems to be solved. The quality of the generated bitmap font also depends on the performance of the rasterizing device that processes the outline font. Therefore, when designing the rasterizing apparatus, it is necessary to evaluate the quality of the generated bitmap font while changing its parameters.
In consideration of such a case, it is necessary to evaluate bitmap fonts in consideration of an extremely large number of combinations of conditions. In addition, the conventional automation device cannot perform detailed evaluation of details such as, for example, whether the line width is uniform or whether the sheath portion is not crushed.

[0005]

The present invention employs the following structure to solve the above problems. <Structure 1> A sampler bitmap font generated by rasterizing an outline font with an original mesh size, and a rasterizing device for generating an evaluation target bitmap font generated by rasterizing the outline font at a size to be evaluated. A control unit for comparing the sample bitmap font and the whole or a part of the evaluation target bitmap font at the same scale, and numerically outputting the proportion of matched bits. Evaluation device.

<Structure 2> A sample bitmap font is generated by rasterizing an outline font with an original mesh size, and the outline font is rasterized at a size to be evaluated to generate a bitmap font to be evaluated. Performing the process of comparing the bitmap font and the whole or a part of the above-mentioned bitmap font to be evaluated at the same scale and digitizing the comparison result for the bitmap fonts to be evaluated of all the requested sizes. Characteristic outline font evaluation method.

<Structure 3> A sample bitmap font is generated by rasterizing an outline font at an original mesh size, and the outline font is rasterized at a size to be evaluated to generate a bitmap font to be evaluated. It is characterized in that the bitmap font and the whole or a part of the bitmap font to be evaluated are compared at the same scale, and the process of digitizing the comparison result is repeatedly executed while changing the parameters for the rasterization. Outline font evaluation method.

<Structure 4> In the outline font evaluation method according to Structure 2 or 3, the ratio of the number of matching bits in the filled portion of the evaluation target bitmap font to the number of bits in the filled portion of the sample bitmap font is An outline font evaluation method, which is a comparison result.

<Structure 5> In the outline font evaluation method according to Structure 2 or 3, the ratio of the number of matching bits in the filled portion of the bitmap font to be evaluated to the number of bits in the filled portion of the bitmap font to be evaluated is expressed by: An outline font evaluation method characterized by using the above comparison result.

<Structure 6> In the outline font evaluation method according to Structure 2 or 3, the ratio of the number of bits of the filled portion to the total number of bits of the sample bitmap font, and the ratio of the fill to the total number of bits of the bitmap font to be evaluated. An outline font evaluation method, characterized in that a result of comparison with the ratio of the number of bits of a portion is quantified.

[0011]

DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS Embodiments of the present invention will be described below using specific examples. <Example 1> FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a specific example of an outline font evaluation apparatus according to the present invention. This device is composed of a personal computer, a workstation, or the like, and is controlled by the control unit 1. The control unit 1 is connected to a user interface unit 2, a rasterizing device 3, a storage unit 4, and a display unit 5.

The control section 1 is a section having a processor and the like operated by a computer program. The user interface unit 2 is composed of devices such as a keyboard and a mouse, and is a part that performs an input operation to specify a process requested by the operator. The rasterizing device 3 is a part having a function of developing an outline font. The whole or a part of the rasterizing apparatus may be configured by software, and may be included in a part of a program operated by the control unit 1.

The storage unit 4 stores an outline font 6. Then, in order to carry out the present invention, the sample bitmap font 7
And an evaluation target bitmap font 8 are generated and stored in the storage unit 4. Further, the scale of the evaluation target bitmap font 8 is adjusted by the control unit 1, and the bitmap font 9 after the scale adjustment is generated and stored in the storage unit 4.

The display unit 5 includes a display for displaying the result of processing by the control unit 1 and the like. The result of the comparison operation performed by the control unit 1 for outline font evaluation in the manner described later is displayed on the display unit 5. The present invention is characterized in that the comparison result is displayed numerically. It is assumed that the outline font 6 is newly designed and developed, for example, and materials for evaluating the rasterized state as objectively as possible for each size are automatically output.

FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram of the sample bitmap font 7. The outline font is designed in advance with a predetermined mesh size. This mesh size is called an original mesh size, and a bitmap font generated by rasterizing with this original mesh size is called a sample bitmap font.

FIG. 2 shows a sample bitmap font for the character "A". The outline font includes coordinate data for displaying the outline of a character to be displayed by a coordinate value. The coordinate data includes an on-curve point, an off-curve point, and the like. The accuracy of the coordinate system for expressing the value is the mesh size, for example, 256
A value such as × 256 or 512 × 512 (X × Y coordinates) is used.

This mesh size is standardized for all characters included in the outline font. In this example, the mesh size is 64 × 64. By design, characters rasterized at this size are of sufficiently high quality, as shown in FIG. If this is rasterized at, for example, 32 × 32 points, it will be evaluated how much quality bitmap font can be obtained.

FIG. 3 (a) displays the character "A" of 32.times.32 dots corresponding to a size of 3.84 points at the same resolution as that of FIG. 2, for example, at a resolution of 600 dpi. This is the bitmap font 7 to be evaluated
(FIG. 1). In the present invention, in order to evaluate the bitmap font 8 to be evaluated, first, the bitmap font to be evaluated in FIG. 3A is enlarged so as to have the same scale as the sample bitmap font 7 shown in FIG. do it,
Adjust the scale.

That is, the bitmap font to be evaluated after rasterization shown in FIG. 3A is directly doubled in both the X-axis direction and the Y-axis direction. If 32 × 32 dots are doubled in the X and Y directions, respectively, the result is 64 × 64 dots. That is, the scale-adjusted bitmap font 9 shown in (b) is generated by copying all the dots shown in (a) 2 × 2 times in the X and Y directions. Then, the sample bitmap font shown in FIG. 2 and the evaluation target bitmap font after the scale adjustment shown in FIG. 3B are compared using a computer.

FIG. 4 shows a flowchart of the comparison operation performed by the control unit 1 shown in FIG. This process
3 specifically shows processing contents of a computer program executed by the control unit 1. This computer program is stored in a ROM (not shown) provided inside the control unit 1.
(Read only memory) or the like.

As shown in the figure, an operator first sets the character size of a bitmap font to be evaluated using the user interface unit 2 (step S1). For example, in the case of 32 points as described with reference to FIG. 3, the setting is made by inputting the character “32”.
Next, in step S2, a character code is set.
In the case of the character "A" shown in FIGS. 2 and 3, the character code is "0x3024 (JIS code)".

Next, in step S3, the number of developed dots, that is, 32 specified in step S1, is set in the parameter N. In step S4, the mesh size, ie, 64 described with reference to FIG.
In step S5, a process of calculating the least common multiple (LCM) of N and M is performed. Then, this is set to L. In this case, the least common multiple is 64.

In the next step S6, the development result with the number of dots N is set as the bitmap font 8 to be evaluated, as shown in FIG.
In the storage unit 4 shown in FIG. The data is converted to data DAT
A1. In step S7, this data DA
Processing for multiplying TA1 by L / N is performed. That is, the data shown in FIG. 3A is scaled as shown in FIG. The data after the scale adjustment is DATA2.

In step S8, the development result of the outline font with the mesh size, that is, the development result with the number of dots L is set as data DATA0. This is data of the sample bitmap font 7 in the storage unit 4 shown in FIG. Here, in step S9, fidelity and correctness are calculated. In the present invention, the fidelity and the correctness are examples of criteria for quantifying the result in order to display the result of the comparison operation processing using a computer in an easily evaluated form.

First, when the sample bitmap font 7 and the scale-adjusted bitmap font 9 are superimposed, the number of filled dots in each font is counted, and this is set to P. At this time, the fidelity is obtained by the following equation. Fidelity = (P / number of black dots included in sample bitmap font) × 100 [%] The accuracy is calculated by the following equation. Correctness = (P / number of black dots included in bitmap font 9 after scale adjustment) × 100 [%]

FIG. 5 shows a result display example (part 1).
This result is output by the display unit 5 on a display screen or a printer. That is, here, both the sample bitmap font 7 and the scale-adjusted bitmap font 9 of the character "A" shown on the left side of the figure display black portions with black squares, and only the sample bitmap font 7 is displayed. The black dot portion is displayed as a white square, and the scale-adjusted bitmap font 9 displays the black dot portion as a white triangle. In this display example, the sample bitmap font 7 is expressed as a correct dot pattern, and the bitmap font 9 after the scale adjustment is displayed as a comparison dot pattern. Is devised.

According to the above formula for determining the fidelity and the correctness, in this example, the fidelity is 90% and the correctness is 89.7%. When the comparison result is displayed in such a manner, the operator actually recognizes the result of the comparison by superimposing the sample bitmap font and the bitmap font to be evaluated as an image, and the evaluation is digitized. Processing to be reflected in outline font design becomes easier.

FIG. 6 shows another result display example (part 2). This shows a comparison result example when the mesh size is 128 × 128. According to this example, the fidelity is 86.6.
% And the accuracy is 87.6%. This indicates that the quality is slightly lower than in the example shown in FIG.

FIG. 7 shows a result display example (3). This shows a case where the mesh size is 128 and the number of developed dots is 64. In the comparison result, the fidelity is 96.6% and the correctness is 95.9%. It can be seen that the results of the actual comparison between FIG. 6 and FIG. It can be seen that the quality shown in FIG. 7 is considerably better than that shown in FIG.

<Effect of Specific Example 1> As described above, the sample bitmap font and the evaluation target bitmap font are generated using the rasterizing device, and the evaluation target bitmap font is converted to the same scale as the sample bitmap font. By comparing and outputting the ratio of the bits that match both numerically by a calculation method such as fidelity or correctness, it is possible to objectively quickly evaluate the outline font and reflect it in its design. .

In the above example, the comparison operation is performed for the entire outline font. However, a specific area is designated, such as a curved part of a character or a peripheral part of a character, and only that part is compared. You can do it. The same applies to the following examples. Further, in the example of FIG. 4, an example is shown in which the comparison process is executed by designating the character size, the character code, the number of developed dots, and the like one by one.
For example, in the range of a predetermined character code, 16 dots to 128
As in the case of dots, the comparison operation processing may be designated in a wide range, and a large amount of the above data may be automatically created. As a result, the outline font design work can be further speeded up.

<Specific Example 2> In the above example, the designed outline font was rasterized by the rasterizing device by a predetermined means, and the evaluation was performed using the font size as a parameter. Therefore, it is possible to evaluate all font sizes on demand.

On the other hand, if the processing method of the rasterizing device is different, the quality of the obtained bitmap font is different. One of the processes of the rasterizing device is a process called a smoothing process. This is a process of approximating an outline curve with a plurality of straight lines. When a curve is approximated by a plurality of straight lines, the quality of the obtained bitmap font varies depending on the number of approximate straight lines, that is, the degree of fineness. Approximating with a number of short straight lines increases the quality, while reducing the number of straight lines decreases the quality.

The number of such straight lines, that is, a parameter indicating the accuracy of the approximate fineness, is called a smoothing threshold. In order to optimize the smoothing threshold at the time of designing the rasterizing apparatus, it is preferable to perform the evaluation as in the above-described specific example 1. In this specific example, the comparison result is displayed while sequentially changing the smoothing threshold of the rasterizing device 3 using the same outline font. The configuration of the evaluation device itself is the same as that shown in FIG.

FIG. 8 is a flowchart showing the operation of the apparatus according to the second embodiment. Step S in the flowchart shown in FIG.
The processing of 1 to step S10 is the same as the processing of the specific example 1 described using FIG. Steps S11 and S in FIG.
The part 12 is a part newly added in this specific example. That is, in step S11, it is determined whether or not the parameters of the rasterizer are to be changed.
In, the rasterizer parameters are set.

That is, initially, the parameters of the rasterizer are set to, for example, 0.05. Then, after performing the evaluation as described in the specific example 1, in step S11, the parameter is switched to another parameter. Further, the processing from step S7 to step S10 is executed using various parameters, and the result is displayed.

FIG. 9 shows a result display example (part 4).
Also in this case, the character to be evaluated was "A". Here, the smoothing threshold is set to 1.0. The number of developed dots is 32 and the mesh size is 64. As a result, when the same comparison processing as that of the specific example 1 is performed, the fidelity is 90% and the correctness is 89.7%.

Next, FIG. 10 shows a result display example (part 5). Here, the smoothing threshold was set to 0.05 under the same conditions. When the smoothing threshold value is reduced, the accuracy of fineness at the time of linear approximation increases. That is, the quality should be improved. As a result of executing the same comparison operation processing as in the specific example 1, the fidelity is 90.1% and the correctness is 8 as shown in FIG.
It is 9.9%. In other words, it can be seen that the quality of the character is slightly increased. Therefore, when such an evaluation is performed by setting the smoothing threshold to various values, an objective performance evaluation based on the numerical value of the rasterizer itself becomes possible.

<Effect of Specific Example 2> The quality evaluation as described above makes it possible to objectively evaluate the quality of the outline font and the rasterizer as in the specific example 1. Further, even if the operator does not perform a visual check, it is possible to obtain a parameter value of the rasterizer at which the fidelity and the correctness are equal to or more than a certain value, and optimize the parameter value of the rasterizer. In the above example, the smoothing threshold is used as a parameter of the rasterizer. However, since the rasterizer performs various other arithmetic processing, a parameter that affects the quality of the character is freely selected and the same evaluation is performed. It becomes possible to do.

<Specific Example 3> In this example, the area ratio of the painted portion between the sample bitmap font and the evaluation target bitmap font is compared and evaluated by obtaining an area ratio described later. FIG. 11 is an operation flowchart of the third embodiment. FIG. 12 is a specific flowchart showing the outline area ratio calculation in step S6 and the expansion processing in step S10 shown in FIG. The operation of the third embodiment will be described with reference to these flowcharts. Note that the evaluation device for implementing this specific example may have the same block configuration as that of the specific example 1.

In step S1 of FIG. 11, first, in FIG.
1 recognizes the attribute of the outline font 6. In step S2, the attribute is displayed on the display unit 5. FIG. 14 shows the display unit 5 in this step S2.
6 is a display example of the screen displayed in FIG. The attributes of the outline font include, for example, font name, mesh size, dropout control, execution range, and hint processing.
The mesh size is the original size as described above. Also, dropout control refers to a process of performing control so that unpainted portions do not occur when a character is developed with a small dot size.
This control is executed when a font smaller than a dot is generated.

The hint process is a process of correcting a contour in order to maintain uniformity of line width when developing a character with a small dot size. In this example, 128
The hint processing is executed for characters below the dot.

Next, in step S3 of FIG. 11, the character size is set. That is, the user interface section 2 is operated to input the character size of the font to be evaluated. Here, it is assumed that a size of 25 dots is set. This size corresponds to 6 point characters at a resolution of 300 dpi.

Next, in step S4, character size dependent information is displayed. FIG. 15 shows this step S4
An example of display is shown. As shown in the figure, items such as character size, dropout control, and hint processing are newly added to the display example shown in FIG. Although the drop-out control has already been described, since the control execution range is 64 dots or less and the hint processing execution range is 128 dots or less, it is necessary to perform both processes in the character size of 25 dots to be executed. become. A 25 × 25 bitmap area is set in the left frame of the display unit.

Next, in step S5, the control unit 1 receives the character code input in the user interface unit 2. For example, as a character code, 0x37
(Half-width character 7 of JIS code) is designated.

In step S6, the area ratio of the outline is calculated. FIG. 12A shows the content of the calculation processing of the area ratio. In step S61, the expansion processing with the mesh size is performed. Then, in step S62, the bitmap area ratio is calculated. Performing the mesh size development process requires a large amount of memory area for the rasterizer, but it is also possible to partially divide the development process.

FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of the result of the expansion processing with the mesh size. Mesh size is 25 vertical
6, 256 horizontal dots. Here, the term “area ratio” refers to the ratio of the number of dots that are painted to represent a character in a rectangle including characters, that is, a rectangle of 256 × 256 dots. In other words, it is defined as being filled (the number of dots / the number of rectangular dots) × 100 [%].

In the case of the example shown in the figure, 256 × 256 = 65
536 is the number of rectangular dots. The number of black dots painted is 5,759. Therefore, the area ratio is (5759/65536) × 100 = 8.788 [%]
Becomes In the next step S7, character dependent information is displayed.

FIG. 16 shows a display example. Here, an item of the outline area ratio is newly added to the example of FIG. This outline area ratio is as the result calculated in step S6. In the next step S8, rasterizer parameters are set. Rasterizer parameters are input from the user interface unit 2. Here, a parameter called a smoothing threshold of 1.0 is set,
It is assumed that the Non / Zero method is designated as the filling method.

The smoothing threshold value is the precision of the fineness when approximating the outline curve by a plurality of straight lines as described in the second embodiment. The Non / Zero-Winding method is one of the painting methods, and the other is Eve.
There is an n-Odd method. These are all well-known methods for filling outline fonts.
Since the present invention is not particularly relevant, a detailed description is omitted.

In step S9, the display of the rasterizer setting information is performed. FIG. 17 shows an example of the display.
Here, items of a smoothing threshold and a painting method are newly added. The contents are as described above. Next, in step S10, a development process is performed. FIG. 12B shows a specific procedure of the expansion processing.

First, in step S101, a path construction process is performed. The path construction process is a process of reading outline information written in a font, that is, coordinate data, an attribute flag, and the like, scaling a target dot size, and generating an outline of a character-filled portion. In the next step S102, an original outline is displayed.

FIG. 18 shows an example in which the original outline is displayed. This is the outline as calculated. Next, in step S103,
Perform hint processing. The outline of the original outline is corrected based on the hint information included in the attribute data.
In the next step S104, the corrected outline is displayed.

FIG. 19 shows the result. The broken line is the original outline, and the solid line is the corrected outline. The corrected outline is generated by moving each coordinate point of the original outline to the nearest grid point or the like. Next, step S10
At 5, a smoothing process is performed. Further, step S
At 106, a painting process is performed. Here, the inside of the outline is painted out by the Non-Zero method.

Here, returning to FIG. 11 again, step S1
In step 1, the area ratio of the bitmap font is calculated.
The definition of the area ratio is as described in step S6.
In this example, the number of dots of a rectangle including a character is 25 × 2
5 = 625. The number of dots in the painted portion is 52. Therefore, the area ratio is (52/625) × 1
00 = 8.32 [%].

Next, in step S12, the difference between the area ratio when rasterizing with the original mesh size and the area ratio when rasterizing with the target 25 × 25 dots is quantified. Given this as the percentage difference,
It is calculated by the following formula. Difference = | bitmap area ratio-outline area ratio |
[%] Difference ratio = (difference / outline area ratio) × 100 [%] As a result of this calculation, the difference is 0.468 and the difference ratio is 5.32.
It becomes 5. In the next step S13, bitmap information including the calculation result is displayed.

FIG. 20 shows a display example in this case. As shown in the figure, the bitmap area ratio, the difference, and the difference ratio are displayed as the above results. In the next step S14, it is determined whether or not the parameters of the rasterizer have been changed, and as described in the specific example 2, the same comparison operation processing result is displayed while sequentially changing the parameters of the rasterizer.

In the next step S15, it is determined whether or not there is a change in the character code, and processing is performed for all the requested character codes. Further, step S
At 16, it is determined whether there is a change in the character size,
Processing for all requested character sizes is performed.

<Effect of Specific Example 3> As described above, the ratio of the number of bits of the filled portion to the total number of bits of the sample bitmap font, and the ratio of the number of bits of the filled portion to the total number of bits of the evaluation target bitmap font By digitizing the result of the comparison with, it is possible to perform an objective evaluation using the same numerical values as in the specific examples so far. The above display example is an example, and various data can be displayed. For example, for fonts,
It is also possible to display the number of coordinate points in the outline data and use it as an evaluation criterion.

<Specific Example 4> In this example, similarly to the specific example 3, the area ratio of the bitmap and the area ratio of the outline are obtained, and the ratio is calculated. FIG. 21 shows an operation flowchart of the fourth embodiment. First, in step S1,
As described above, the character size is set using the user interface unit 2. Next, in step S2, a character code is set. Further, in step S3, a development process is executed.

Then, in step S4, the bitmap area ratio is calculated. For example, it is assumed that a character size of 9.6 points is set at a resolution of 40 dots, that is, 300 dpi. And the character code is 0
It is assumed that x2343 (full-width character C of JIS code) is set. The area ratio of the bitmap data is calculated for the character "C" of 40 dots. The calculation of the area ratio is as described in the third embodiment.

That is, in this example, the number of rectangular dots is 40
× 40 = 1600. In addition, the number of dots painted to represent the character C is 130. Therefore,
The area ratio is 130/1600 × 100 = 8.25 [%].

Next, in step S5, the area ratio of the outline is calculated. As for the area ratio of the outline, a calculation is performed on a bitmap generated by expanding the mesh size in the same manner as described in the third embodiment.

FIG. 22 is an explanatory diagram of the result of the development processing with the mesh size. As shown in FIG.
When the character C is developed with 256 horizontal dots, the number of filled black dots is 5,790. The number of rectangular dots is 256 × 256. Therefore, as shown in the figure, the area ratio is 8.834 [%].

Next, in step S6, a difference and a difference rate are calculated. This calculation is as described in the second embodiment. That is, in this case, the difference is 0.709 and the difference rate is 8.026 [%]. The result is shown in FIG.

FIG. 23A shows a display example of the result.
(B) is a display example of the result when the number of dots is changed to 50 dots. As shown in this figure, when the number of dots is changed from 40 dots to 50 dots, the difference and the difference rate are reduced. That is, if the number of dots is increased, a bitmap can be generated more faithfully. Therefore, it can be understood that this evaluation result is objective and can be widely applied to bitmaps of various sizes.

<Effect of Specific Example 4> As in the specific example 3, by utilizing the difference and the difference rate, it is possible to objectively evaluate the bitmap font.

[Brief description of the drawings]

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a specific example of an outline font evaluation device of the present invention.

FIG. 2 is an explanatory diagram of a sample bitmap font.

FIG. 3 is an explanatory diagram of an evaluation target bitmap font.

FIG. 4 is an operation flowchart of a specific example 1.

FIG. 5 is a result display example (1).

FIG. 6 is a result display example (2).

FIG. 7 is a result display example (3).

FIG. 8 is an operation flowchart of a specific example 2.

FIG. 9 is a result display example (part 4).

FIG. 10 is a result display example (No. 5).

FIG. 11 is an operation flowchart of a specific example 3.

12A is an outline area ratio calculation flowchart, and FIG. 12B is an expansion processing flowchart.

FIG. 13 is an explanatory diagram of a result obtained by performing a development process with a mesh size.

FIG. 14 is a display example (S2).

FIG. 15 is a display example (S4).

FIG. 16 is a display example (S7).

FIG. 17 is a display example (S9).

FIG. 18 is a display example (S102).

FIG. 19 is a display example (S11).

FIG. 20 is a display example (S13).

FIG. 21 is an operation flowchart of a specific example 4.

FIG. 22 is an explanatory diagram of a result obtained by performing expansion processing with a mesh size.

FIG. 23 is an explanatory diagram of a result display example.

[Explanation of symbols]

 Reference Signs List 1 control unit 2 user interface unit 3 rasterizing device 4 storage unit 5 display unit 6 outline font 7 sample bitmap font 8 bitmap font to be evaluated 9 bitmap font after scale adjustment

Claims (6)

[Claims] 1. A rasterizing apparatus for generating a sample bitmap font generated by rasterizing an outline font with an original mesh size and an evaluation target bitmap font generated by rasterizing the outline font to a size to be evaluated. And a control unit for comparing the whole or a part of the sample bitmap font and the evaluation target bitmap font at the same scale, and numerically outputting the ratio of the matched bits. Font evaluation device. 2. A sample bitmap font is generated by rasterizing an outline font with an original mesh size, and a bitmap font to be evaluated is generated by rasterizing the outline font at a size to be evaluated. And comparing the whole or a part of the font and the evaluation target bitmap font at the same scale, and performing a process of digitizing the comparison result for the evaluation target bitmap fonts of all requested sizes. Outline font evaluation method. 3. A sample bitmap font is generated by rasterizing an outline font with an original mesh size, and a bitmap font to be evaluated is generated by rasterizing the outline font at a size to be evaluated. An outline of comparing the whole or a part of the font and the bitmap font to be evaluated at the same scale, and repeatedly executing a process of digitizing the comparison result while changing the parameter for rasterization. Font evaluation method. 4. The outline font evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein the ratio of the number of matching bits of the filled portion of the evaluation target bitmap font to the number of bits of the filled portion of the sample bitmap font is compared. A method of evaluating an outline font, which is a result. 5. The outline font evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein the ratio of the number of matching bits of the filled portion of the bitmap font to be evaluated to the number of bits of the filled portion of the bitmap font to be evaluated is determined by: An outline font evaluation method, which is a comparison result. 6. The outline font evaluation method according to claim 2, wherein the ratio of the number of bits of the filled portion to the total number of bits of the sample bitmap font, and the ratio of the filled portion to the total number of bits of the bitmap font to be evaluated. An evaluation method of an outline font, characterized in that a result of comparison with a ratio of the number of bits of a character is digitized.