Titling fonts

Adrian Heathcote adrian.heathcote@philosophy.usyd.edu.au
Mon, 29 Jul 2002 04:09:57 +0200

Hi Lars

>> But with Bembo Titling I came upon a hitch. I followed your Berry
>> naming suggestion for the Regular and got mbbrd8a. So far so good.
>> But there is also a Bembo Titling Italic. Now what should I name
>> that under the Berry scheme? I'm stumped.
> Why? It's obviously mbbrdi8a (remember that variants can be combined).
> A trickier matter could be to decide on a LaTeX declaration.

mbbrdi was exactly what I'd put---but it was in the LaTeX declaration 
(and the additions that needed to be made to the .fd file) that I'd come 
to a halt.

Would DeclareFixedFont{\tit}{T1}{mbb}{m}{tli}{<size>} do it?

For the roman titling I use tl---is tli an admissable latex declaration?

> If Bembo
> Titling is a shape variation, then Bembo Titling Italic shoud be 
> another,
> but that isn't necessarily what one would want. At least in the case of
> AGaramond, the Titling variation is actually most like a series 
> variation,
> but that idea will probably look really odd to some.
No, but I have made it a shape variation.
> And of course, there
> is always the catch-all possibility to decide that Titling should be a
> different LaTeX family.

Yes, I'd rather not go that way if possible. So can I just invent a new 
shape tli?
> As it says on a picture on my wall here, "The More I Think The More
> Confused I Get."

It's more a matter of knowing what the LaTeX programmers think that's 
the problem.


Adrian Heathcote