[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Alternatives to LaTeX (Was Some comments...)
- To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
- Subject: Re: Alternatives to LaTeX (Was Some comments...)
- From: Hans Aberg <haberg@MATEMATIK.SU.SE>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:57:33 +0200
- Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
- Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK> write:
> > Is there not a problem here: PostScript fonts may only come in one size,
> > which then is rescaled.
> > But in correct typesetting, as in TeX fonts, the weights and proportions
> > actually change with the font size.
> > So how does that work out here?
>um, this is what i would call a canard. we have known this since the
>first uses of PS fonts in TeX (I did my first book in LaTeX with Times
>in 1986). its a fact of life that most PS fonts only come in 10 pt
>size. Some have other sizes. Many Computer Modern fonts have a range
>of sizes, some have more than others.
>99% of the typesetting world gets by fine with the (technically
>perhaps inferior) optical-scaling-plus-hints of Type1 fonts.
>I suggest there are more productive things to worry about
I think Springer Verlag uses TeX in part because it produces the right
thing. So I think simply using rescaled fonts would produce inferior
I would label PS as a "page description" language, whereas TeX is a
"typesetting" language. PS admits correct fonts typesetting, but the
programs used to produce PS output defaults to the simplification of using
merely font rescaling.
So I do not think this is a minor issue, when it comes down to TeX; this
is in fact something that really makes TeX typesetting.