[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Alternatives to LaTeX
- To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
- Subject: Re: Alternatives to LaTeX
- From: Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK>
- Date: Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:45:55 +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>
> you claiming I do that, but Computer Modern and TeX were originally
> developed as a matching pair.
I have diverged from people my own age to whom i was close 35 years
> So do you think that the extra math fonts metric added in the Y&Y AFM
> files for Lucida Math is sufficient for a good TeX or LaTeX font, I mean so
> that people who normally just writes manuscripts could just flip it
They do so, in their thousands. Y&Y's market is discerning scientific
publishers and authors, and their selling point is high quality math,
both CMR and Lucida. I don't want to plug Y&Y particularly, but they
demonstrate that you can develop and market good math fonts for use
with TeX. The LaTeX PSNFSS package has extensive support for
Lucida. Of course, real purists will find stuff to carp about in
Lucida, and scaled fonts, but does anyone seriously suggest it isnt a
serious math typesetting face?
this discussion isnt going anywhere...