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

**To**:*jeremy@cs.aukuni.ac.nz***Subject**:**Re: Miscellany****From**:*bbeeton <BNB@MATH.AMS.ORG>***Date**: 07 Aug 1993 11:00:06 -0400 (EDT)**Cc**:*math-font-discuss@cogs.susx.ac.uk*

regarding confusion between $a$ and a, the example given has both of them, so the distinction should be clear. but what if there's only one? as in \begin{theorem} For infinitely many values of $a$ goldfish can be $a$-automatically generated. \end{theorem} (apologies if this is utter nonsense; my mathematical education was channeled through calculus and never got beyond it or out of the rut.) the actual mechanism used in metafont to generate the different shapes is to increase the value of certain parameters, in particular the unit width. the shape of the cap I simply doesn't have enough distinct features that such manipulation will yield an instantly perceptible difference. i doubt that knuth thought much about the likelihood of I being used in theorems as a pronoun, but he did have distinct preferences for the shape of italic letters used as symbols. i recommend (re)reading his gibbs lecture, "mathematical typography", published in the bulletin (new series) of the ams, march 1979, v.1, no.2, pp.337-372, and reprinted as the first section of the digital press/ams manual "tex and metafont: new directions in typesetting", pp.1-45. the techniques used in mf84 (the present implementation) are different from those described in the prototype, but the basic goals are the same -- an answer to the question ``If the great type designers of the past were alive today, how would they design fonts for the new equipment?'' [knuth, gibbs lecture, ibid, p.17] -- bb

- Prev by Date:
**Re: Miscellany** - Next by Date:
**Re: integrals** - Prev by thread:
**Re: Miscellany** - Next by thread:
**interesting ideas --- interesting ideas** - Index(es):