[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: Robin Fairbairns <Robin.Fairbairns@CL.CAM.AC.UK>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 13:46:16 +0100
- 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>
> So is the suggestion that the LaTeX3 project should start use rescaled
> fonts, just because everybody else is doing so, or in favour of a fonts
> matching issue, or because the Springer typesetting is appaling in some
> other respects?
What a dotty suggestion! I merely claimed that we have other more
pressing things to worry about than whether or not Fred Bloggs chooses
to use linearly-scaled fonts with LaTeX. Sebastian did the same.
Michael Downes has since added that maths requires lots of use of
small fonts, and therefore implies a need for optical scaling. I
presume he means `optically-scaled maths fonts' (or are there effects
on the text of mathematical publications that I wot not of?). Which
would seem to me to imply that one may not use anything but CMR (or
publishers' private fonts, about which I know essentially nothing
apart from their existence) for maths...