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

*To*: fj@cs.auc.dk*Subject*: Re: MF ==> (PS type1)*From*: "Berthold K.P. Horn" <bkph@ai.mit.edu>*Date*: Tue, 11 Mar 1997 14:00:14 -0500 (EST)*CC*: pflynn@curia.ucc.ie, metafont@ens.fr, tex-fonts@math.utah.edu*Flags*: 000000000000*In-reply-to*: <199703111835.TAA11847@micro.cs.auc.dk> (message from FrankJensen on Tue, 11 Mar 1997 19:35:27 +0100 (MET))*Reply-to*: bkph@ai.mit.edu

I forgot the most important thing: greek letters, both lowercase and uppercase. EUSB is indeed a bold script font. What I meant to refer to was EUSM/EUSB (for the medium and bold script fonts). This font (the MF version of it at least) has a layout similar to CMSY, although some characters are missing (\cdot, \times, and such). You can rest assured that the Type 1 versions have *exactly* the same glyphs as the original MF versions (except they also have a genuine `space' character). It is slightly misleading to say that EURM contains only alphabetic characters, since it contains all latin and greek letters in both lowercase and uppercase versions. In addition, it contains arabic numerals, some punctuation characters, less than/greater than signs, the `slash' and the \partial signs, \imath, \jmath. The layout is similar to CMMI. Well it has the alphabet in the same place :=) But it is missing most of the `math' glyphs. Again, I can only talk about the MF version, since that is the only version I know. See above. bkph> By the way, I still don't see the `contradiction' you alluded to :=). You said that only EUEX was available in Type1 format, but the BSR and Y&Y web sites say that also the other Euler fonts are available. You misunderstood. What I meant was that the only `math' font in the Euler font group is EUEX*. I assumed that the Type1 versions of these fonts contained the same glyphs as the MF versions, so I concluded that enough glyphs were available to create the ``Euler look'' from the Concrete Mathematics book using Type1 fonts only. Well, tell me whether it uses CM math fonts or not. Then we can settle the question of whether there is a `fourth choice' /Frank

**References**:**Re: MF ==> (PS type1)***From:*Frank Jensen <fj@cs.auc.dk>

- Prev by Date:
**Re: BlueSky fonts and subfont (and FixFont)** - Next by Date:
**Is EULER math?; was: Re: MF ==> (PS type1** - Prev by thread:
**Re: MF ==> (PS type1)** - Next by thread:
**Is EULER math?; was: Re: MF ==> (PS type1** - Index(es):