FOOTNOTE and (*ESC*){super a} different results if FONT= is used to change font.

[data_null__]

Test program

%macro testfoot(font=);
ods escapechar='~';
ods pdf file="~/Testfoot&font..pdf" style=journal;
footnote2
   j=Left
   %if %superQ(font) ne %then font=&font;
   h=8pt
"Coded using MedDRA version 16.1"
"~{NEWLINE}~{super a}Grd. = Severity, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, 4 = life-threatening, 5 = fatal"
"~{NEWLINE}~{super b}Rel. = Related to IP, Yes/No"
"~{NEWLINE}~{super c}Action taken with investigational product for this event, 01 = no action taken, 02 = inv. product dose altered or withheld, 03 = inv. product discontinued, 88 = other"
"~{NEWLINE}~{super d}Other non-investigational product action taken for this event, 01 = no action taken, 02 = medication taken, 03 = hospitalization/prolonged hospitalization, 04 = removed from study, 05 = transfusion performed, 88 = other"
"~{NEWLINE}~{super e}Ser. = Serious, Yes/No";
proc report data=sashelp.class nowd list;
   column name ('~S={borderbottomcolor=BLACK}This is spanned' age sex height weight);
   run;
ods pdf close;
%mend testfoot;

%testfoot(font=Arial);

%testfoot();

I must be doing something wrong but it seems like the superscripts should have the same look (smaller than main font) when I user ARIAL font as when I use the default font whatever it is.

[Ksharp]

I think it is not your fault, it is sas font's fault . why not make other font to be larger than superscript ?

"~{NEWLINE}~{super a} ~S={fontsize=20px}Grd. = Severity, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate, 3 = severe, 4 = life-threatening, 5 = fatal"

Xia Keshan

[data_null__]

I don't want a work-around I want to know why it works as expected with the default font but not when I change it.

[Cynthia_sas]

Hi:

  If you want to know EXACTLY why, then you need to open a track with Tech Support. However, using Arial with ODS PDF is just something that I don't do. I usually use either Arial Unicode MS or Albany AMT or Helvetica with PDF. There was a whole kerfuffle over Arial and Adobe and I believe that to get something that looks like the Microsoft Arial used in ODS PDF, you have to refer to it as Arial Unicode MS in ODS PDF styles. This article about Arial has more of the background about the kerfuffle: The Scourge of Arial – Notebook – Mark Simonson. In the early days of ODS, like version 7 and early version 8,  it used to be (according to one of the developers) that if you specified just plain Arial for ODS PDF, you got Helvetica substituted as the font behind the scenes. That doesn't happen anymore, but in the "old days", the way around that was to specify the Arial Unicode MS font, which is the Adobe version of plain old Arial. Then, in SAS 9.2, we included some TrueType fonts and the Albany AMT font became the Arial "look-alike".

  BTW, there are some good font explanations of the differing behavior here http://support.sas.com/resources/papers/proceedings10/035-2010.pdf, but none talk specifically about the Arial MS issue.

  But for the final, definitive WHY, you should open a track with Tech Support.

cynthia

[Tom]

What version of SAS?  On Windows using SAS 9.4 m0 release both are using the same arial fonts and have the same extra spaces between lines.

[data_null__]

Unix SAS 9.3.

[jakarman]

@Tom good question. I remember to have seen a post that before SAS 9.3 the OS font is used and 9.3 and later are using the JAVA font.
When you use Windows latin1 font there should be no great differences but on Unix latin1 is having some other symbols (first 32 above 7F).
Fonts can behave different all that time as the versions are changing.