Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.8FFCE57C@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:44:04 +0100 Return-Path: <@vm.gmd.de:LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.8FFCE57C" 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: RE:magsteps Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1992 16:08:51 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Dominik Wujastyk" Sender: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" To: "Rainer M. Schoepf" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 482 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.8FFCE57C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable About magsteps, Frank says \begin{quotation} > First of all, who uses the current set of font? That's something I > wonder for quite some time but would like to her facts. I know that > some commercial installations (and also emtex, for example, if one > makes fonts for it without much knowledge about TeX internals, i.e., > using mfjob all) will fill up the hard disk by generating every font > even 5pt ones in every magstep known. The result is a huge number of > fonts from that about 85% are never used. \end{quotation} Yes, "mfjob all" will make all the fonts at all the sizes, but surely the very point of mfjob is to make it easy to make only the fonts you need. That's why it is easy to specify names and magsteps, etc. Furthermore, dvi translators such as dvips and the latest beta versions of the emtex drivers will actually call metafont to create any fonts whose bitmaps are not found when the DVI is examined. I have been meaning for some time now to start with a tabula rasa of bitmaps, and see what fonts actually get generated, on a need-to-use basis. Has anyone else already done this? Obviously the fonts used by different people will vary, and only a statistical answer about frequency of use is possible. \begin{quotation} > So the questions: > > 1) Which fonts are actually in standard use? > > 2) If we provide a typographical standard set of fontsizes does this > increase the storage or reduce it if we at the same time make a go to > reduce all the unnecessary magstep versions? > > 3) Having a second set font magnified to 1.2 does make sense, when we > want to increase the resolution by optically reducing the output from > TeX. It is not correct to use 12pt option! How many magnifications = are > necessary for this purpose? One or two? (Most certainly not seven) \end{quotation} This all sounds very reasonable to me. A proper set of design sizes, together with perhaps one or two magsteps. Dominik ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.8FFCE57C Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE:magsteps

About magsteps, Frank says
\begin{quotation}
 > First of all, who uses the current set of = font? That's something I
 > wonder for quite some time but would like = to her facts. I know that
 > some commercial installations (and also = emtex, for example, if one
 > makes fonts for it without much knowledge = about TeX internals, i.e.,
 > using mfjob all) will fill up the hard = disk by generating every font
 > even 5pt ones in every magstep known. The = result is a huge number of
 > fonts from that about 85% are never = used.
\end{quotation}
Yes, "mfjob all" will make all the fonts at = all the sizes, but
surely the very point of mfjob is to make it easy to = make only
the fonts you need.  That's why it is easy to = specify names and
magsteps, etc.  Furthermore, dvi translators = such as dvips and
the latest beta versions of the emtex drivers will = actually
call metafont to create any fonts whose bitmaps are = not found
when the DVI is examined.  I have been meaning = for some time now
to start with a tabula rasa of bitmaps, and see what = fonts actually
get generated, on a need-to-use basis.  Has = anyone else already
done this?  Obviously the fonts used by = different people will vary,
and only a statistical answer about frequency of use = is possible.

\begin{quotation}
 > So the questions:
 >
 > 1) Which fonts are actually in standard = use?
 >
 > 2) If we provide a typographical standard = set of fontsizes does this
 > increase the storage or reduce it if we at = the same time make a go to
 > reduce all the unnecessary magstep = versions?
 >
 > 3) Having a second set font magnified to = 1.2 does make sense, when we
 > want to increase the resolution by = optically reducing the output from
 > TeX. It is not correct to use 12pt option! = How many magnifications are
 > necessary for this purpose? One or two? = (Most certainly not seven)
\end{quotation}


This all sounds very reasonable to me.  A proper = set of design sizes,
together with perhaps one or two magsteps.

Dominik



------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.8FFCE57C--