I find that .otf fonts work badly in Word. Try .ttf fonts.

That's not really an option because it's a font with loads of alternates, ligatures, features, etc. The kind of font you wouldn't expect people to be using in Word in the first place, but as they are trying to do so, I need a way that it works there.

Perhaps it has to do with the way the font is activated (system catalogue, SuitCase, FontAgent or otherwise)...?

They installed using Fontbook, and it validated fine, but then didn't work in Word. I tested it on a Mac the exact same way and it validated fine but also worked fine in Word. It really does feel like it's a problem with Word but I can't really say to the customer that it's Microsoft's problem, not mine! So if anyone has come up against the same problem and found a fix, I'd be very grateful to know it.

With how rococo much of today's software is, you could blame it on Microsoft and very probably be right.

I've been having the same issue lately. My problem is that the typeface has Regular, Italic, and a third style (all with five different weights). Word seems to be choosing, at random, which fonts it feels like displaying.

If I end up solving it, I'll let you know.

As I understand it, Word only allows for four variants of a typeface—Regular, Italic, Bold and Bold Italic. Any other variation—Light, Condensed, etc.—won’t display in Word’s font menu correctly.

Consequently, My Cool Font ST-Light won’t fly, but My Cool Font Light ST will.

To be on the safe side, what little I do conforms to what Nick mentions - no more than a Regular, Bold, Italic, and Bold Italic styles for a single Family Name, and therefore different Family Names for all other styles.

However, it appears that multiple styles CAN be within a family, even in a Windows and/or MS Office environment:

Adam Twardoch (FontLab) describes a comprehensive font naming convention here:

http://forum.fontlab.com/fontlab-studio-tips-and-tricks/font-family-naming-in-fontlab-studio-5-t313.0.html

Karsten Lücke's approach is in this pdf: http://www.kltf.de/downloads/FontNaming-kltf.pdf

I'm sure that Tom Phinney produced a similar exposition, but I can't seem to find it.

- Herb VB

The font I'm having problems with is a single weight display script, so any problems with naming can't be the cause of my problem. But naming of larger families is a ball-ache if you want them to work in Word etc.

Have you checked the panose values? Believe it or not, Word used to be picky about that. However, I can't find any documentation to cite to back that up at the moment.

Jason C

re: using TTF instead of OTF
If the font contains only Truetype outlines, it can be given a .ttf extension without altering anything except occasionally solving a problem like this. It's worth a try, if your font can stand the conversion of PS outlines to TT outlines.

That's not really an option because it's a font with loads of alternates, ligatures, features, etc.

A TrueType-flavoured OpenType font (ttf) would also support all of these things.

Converted to ttf and sent to MyFonts to test. It'll be a bit strange if it was the postscript format causing problems on a Mac!

I might be right after all ;-)

To add to Jason’s comment: what I now do is make all Panose values (except the first) zero.

It'll be a bit strange if it was the postscript format causing problems on a Mac!

Indeed. :)

Make sure that the customer's file (of your font) is not corrupted. Have them uninstall the font and then reinstall a new, just-downloaded, version. Don't assume that just because the original file got validated that it's okay.

I had already sent an updated version of the postscript version and had the same issue. However, I've just heard back from MyFonts and the truetype version works ok. Interestingly, I asked them to test some of my other fonts (all postscript opentype) and there were no issues with them, so I'm still at a loss as to what was actually causing the issue (Panose values in both otf and ttf files were 2 0 0 0 0 etc.)
Anyway, at least I have a fix for the small amount of people using display fonts in Word (2011) on Mac (OSX 10.7.x), although I'm still inclined to believe it's a problem with certain versions of Word rather than my font!!

Thanks everyone for the suggestions!

It'll be a bit strange if it was the postscript format causing problems on a Mac!

Why do you think that?
Both PCs and Macs have always been shipped with TrueType-flavoured fonts in the last 20 years and especially Office app are mainly targeted to the use of TrueType-flavoured fonts. I have seen much more bugs and problems in operating systems and Office apps related to PostScript-flavoured fonts. Which is not surprising, since TrueType/OpenType TT is just the common format here.
It's only in design apps (like those from Adobe) where PostScript-flavored fonts are much more common and therefore better tested.

orthopaedic shoes

Sorry - Alan Partridge joke... I stand corrected

It'll be a bit strange if it was the postscript format causing problems on a Mac!

Not any more. Expanding what Ralf said, the original Macs made a big splash because of their native Postscript support; Windows required ATM for PS Type 1 fonts until Windows 2000/NT4. However, Apple’s implementation was less than elegant, with its screen-fonts-and-printer-fonts approach.

Apple and Microsoft developed TrueType more or less together in order to bust the Adobe monopoly. Adobe responded by actively dissing the TrueType format, which—in my experience—a lot of Mac users thought was a Windoze-only product.

Now, Apple appears to content to sever entirely its relationship with the company that helped build Apple. Not only is Flash not supported on Mac portable devices, but also I have read that the latest release of OS X doesn't support PS Type 1 fonts any more. I suppose that, if you’re going to burn bridges, you should do a thorough job…

@DaveRowland
orthopaedic shoes ... I stand corrected

Ouch!