[metapost] description of glyph operator for MetaPost v1.200
luecking at uark.edu
Thu May 7 17:31:05 CEST 2009
At 04:15 PM 5/6/2009, you wrote:
>Dan Luecking wrote:
>>At 08:32 AM 5/6/2009, you wrote:
>>>I'd like to make sure the documentation of
>>>the new primitive is sufficiently clear for ordinary users to
>>>understand. You can find a preview of the corresponding section at
>>Is the following really correct?
>> "Clockwise oriented contours add to the shape of a glyph and are
>> drawn in black ink. Counter-clockwise oriented contours erase
>> parts of other contours, i.e., make them transparent again"
>>One normally thinks of counterclockwise as positive and clockwise
>Not in font characters. Type 1 fonts use eofill, with the outer part
>of the path followed clockwise. Weird, but that's how it is.
Is that always true of eofill, or only the version used by type1 fonts?
Perhaps the documentation should stress that glyph contours are
somewhat counterintuitive (at least to mathematicians).
Daniel H. Luecking
Department of Mathematical Sciences
University of Arkansas
"Dubito ergo cogito, cogito ergo sum" --Descartes
More information about the metapost