Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.4FA5F9CC@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:42:16 +0100 Return-Path: <@vm.gmd.de:LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.4FA5F9CC" x-vm-v5-data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil][nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: fondef info Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1991 20:08:07 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Frank Mittelbach" Sender: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" To: "Rainer M. Schoepf" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 471 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.4FA5F9CC Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I looked into the cmr files and noticed that for example cmr17 actually is a font designed for 17.28pt. This opens the question of how to = organize fontshape defs again. I currently think that it might be better to say something like <17.28>cmr17 instead of the white lie calling this <17>cmr17. Of course, this change = would mean that we need a bit more characters from the string pool, but on the = other hand it would allow to say something like <10->cmtt10% and still the 17.28 size and all the others will be scaled correctly. = For Postscript fonts this will be even more important. Any comments? Frank P.S. Has anybody seen the alpha test version at all? ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.4FA5F9CC Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable fondef info

I looked into the cmr files and noticed that for = example cmr17 actually
is a font designed for 17.28pt. This opens the = question of how to organize
fontshape defs again.

I currently think that it might be better to say = something like

   <17.28>cmr17

instead of the white lie calling this <17>cmr17. = Of course, this change would
mean that we need a bit more characters from the = string pool, but on the other
hand it would allow to say something like

   <10->cmtt10%

and still the 17.28 size and all the others will be = scaled correctly. For
Postscript fonts this will be even more = important.

Any comments?

Frank

P.S. Has anybody seen the alpha test version at = all?


------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.4FA5F9CC--