Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.8EE0A6CC@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:44:02 +0100 Return-Path: <@vm.gmd.de:LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.8EE0A6CC" 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 "^From:" nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 x-to: LATEX-L%DHDURZ1.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu x-vm-vheader: ("From:" "Sender:" "Resent-From" "To:" "Apparently-To:" "Cc:" "Subject:" "Date:" "Resent-Date:") nil x-vm-bookmark: 1 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: fondef info Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1992 02:07:00 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Don Hosek" Sender: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" To: "Rainer M. Schoepf" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 472 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.8EE0A6CC 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. Point size is a fairly abstract measurement which has no bearing on any physical feature of printed letters. As long as all the "17pt" type is consistent... In a document style I recently developed which mixed Helvetica and Times, my "10pt" Helvetica was really 9pt and all other Helvetica sizes were similarly reduced by 10% so that Helvetica's x-height would more closely approximate that of Times. (I would also add that this adjustment makes the two faces coexist much more pleasantly in general). -Of course, this change would -mean that we need a bit more characters from the string pool, Am I the only one who sometimes uses smallTeX and runs into problems with the NFSS on complicated documents because of string pool limitations? (In particular, I hit this with emTeX. Big emTeX, big PCTeX and VMSTeX [also big] are fine.) -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? -P.S. Has anybody seen the alpha test version at all? I take it that this has more bearing when one is using the alpha version of the NFSS (which I haven't looked at yet... I've got so many other pressing projects). However, my comments above are likely to still have _some_ relevance in the decision making. -dh ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.8EE0A6CC Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: 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.

Point size is a fairly abstract measurement which has = no bearing
on any physical feature of printed letters. As long = as all the
"17pt" type is consistent... In a document = style I recently
developed which mixed Helvetica and Times, my = "10pt" Helvetica
was really 9pt and all other Helvetica sizes were = similarly
reduced by 10% so that Helvetica's x-height would = more closely
approximate that of Times. (I would also add that = this adjustment
makes the two faces coexist much more pleasantly in = general).

-Of course, this change would
-mean that we need a bit more characters from the = string pool,

Am I the only one who sometimes uses smallTeX and runs = into
problems with the NFSS on complicated documents = because of string
pool limitations? (In particular, I hit this with = emTeX. Big
emTeX, big PCTeX and VMSTeX [also big] are = fine.)

-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?

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

I take it that this has more bearing when one is using = the alpha
version of the NFSS (which I haven't looked at yet... = I've got
so many other pressing projects). However, my = comments above are
likely to still have _some_ relevance in the decision = making.

-dh

------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.8EE0A6CC--