[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 15:46:10 +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>
At 13:46 97-04-16, Robin Fairbairns wrote:
>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...
The experts will have to answer this more carefully, but I do get the
impression that this is indeed the issue: Michael Downes says that small
fonts, as used in indices, do require ``optically scaled'' fonts, as
opposed ``propostionally scaled'' fonts (if I got the terminology right).
So how should one then be able to break out of the use of CMR only, if in
addition the text fonts should match the math fonts, and how far can you
pragmatically get there?
And so on. So you cannot simply flip in some proportionally scaled Adobe
fonts, and expect it to work.