[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

*To*: tex-fonts@math.utah.edu*Subject*: What should go into \textfont1*From*: Alan Jeffrey <alanje@cogs.sussex.ac.uk>*Date*: Mon, 13 Jan 92 17:23:18 GMT*Flags*: 000000000001

Jan Michael Rynning made some sensible comments about which characters should be in \textfont1, in particular that Greek, Latin, and punctuation should all be in it. The only problem is that this contradicts the suggestion aired here earlier that each font (roman, italic, bold, etc.) should have its own math encoding. Under Jan's scheme, `math italic' would contain at least: italic Latin, roman upper Greek, italic lower Greek, roman numerals, and roman punctuation. In the alternate scheme, the math italic font would contain italic Latin, italic Greek, italic numerals and italic punctuation, and the math roman font would contain the same in roman. This presents us with a problem: one scheme allows the LaTeX user to say \(\rm\bf\sigma\) and get a roman bold sigma, but the other produces better spacing. Should a font standard aim to support logical markup, or beautiful typesetting? The answer should be `both', which means that in practice the answer is probably `compromise'... Alan. Alan Jeffrey Tel: +44 273 606755 x 3238 alanje@cogs.sussex.ac.uk School of Cognitive and Computer Sciences, Sussex Univ., Brighton BN1 9QH, UK.

**Follow-Ups**:**What should go into \textfont1***From:*karl@cs.umb.edu (Karl Berry)

- Prev by Date:
**What should go into \textfont1?** - Next by Date:
**What should go into \textfont1** - Prev by thread:
**What should go into \textfont1?** - Next by thread:
**What should go into \textfont1** - Index(es):