Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.93501A54@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:44:09 +0100 Return-Path: <@vm.gmd.de:LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.93501A54" 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 x-to: LATEX-L%DHDURZ1.BITNET@uga.cc.uga.edu Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: magsteps vs. "true sizes" (again) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1992 02:19:00 +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: 514 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.93501A54 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable -there's something i haven't seen in this discussion that happened to -turn up in another forum, namely, what if a font based on computer -modern roman shape description code was generated at exactly 17pt -design size? what should it be called? -by knuth's rules, which say that anything that knuth himself has named -must hold to the exact characteristics he has defined (modulo some -specific exclusions that don't apply to this discussion), and that the -name for such an object can't be used for anything else, - *** such a font can't be called cmr17 *** -i submit that, however loathsome we may find it, cm* fonts are -entrenched in magstep scaling (and vice versa). -so perhaps the argument becomes moot -- "true size" is used for all -fonts not based on cm* code (or other fonts that knuth has named), -while magsteps remain in use for cm* (etc.) fonts. While I think that the issue is important for the cm*17 fonts (which incidentally, I find completely unsuitable for display type anyway), I don't think that there's any compelling reason to not use a generated cmr18, say. Same with ccr24 etc. -i still find the prospect scary, that unless naming conventions, -including scaling, become standardized, someday ams may receive a file -to be processed for typesetter output, all the fonts have names that -are known locally, but some of them are based on scaling conventions -that weren't the same at ams and the originating location when the -fonts were generated. please, someone, prove to me i'm wrong! Sorry, you're right. Remember how your cmss7 and my cmss7 didn't match since the AMS' version was done by hand and mine was from Sauter's algorithims. Ditto with the small cmcsc fonts plus the WSU extended CM for display sizes. -(we've already had bad experience with the fonts from one typesetter -manufacturer, who shall remain nameless, where what they called 10pt -times, when compared with 10pt times from any other source, was -clearly larger -- in fact, almost certainly 11pt or a bit larger. -when mixed with garamond for titling, 14pt times (linear scaling) -turned out to be noticeably larger than 18pt garamond! try explaining -*that* to the designer who's checking how well the implementation -adheres to the spec.!) Such is the awful world of type sizes. For LaTeX's sake, I suggest we adopt the ec fonts when completed as the default set for LaTeX since those have built in parameterization for other sizes (I hope since this is the second time I've said so). -dh ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.93501A54 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: magsteps vs. "true sizes" (again)

-there's something i haven't seen in this discussion = that happened to
-turn up in another forum, namely, what if a font = based on computer
-modern roman shape description code was generated at = exactly 17pt
-design size?  what should it be called?
-by knuth's rules, which say that anything that knuth = himself has named
-must hold to the exact characteristics he has = defined (modulo some
-specific exclusions that don't apply to this = discussion), and that the
-name for such an object can't be used for anything = else,
-        *** such = a font can't be called cmr17 ***

-i submit that, however loathsome we may find it, cm* = fonts are
-entrenched in magstep scaling (and vice = versa).
-so perhaps the argument becomes moot -- "true = size" is used for all
-fonts not based on cm* code (or other fonts that = knuth has named),
-while magsteps remain in use for cm* (etc.) = fonts.

While I think that the issue is important for the = cm*17 fonts
(which incidentally, I find completely unsuitable for = display
type anyway), I don't think that there's any = compelling reason to
not use a generated cmr18, say. Same with ccr24 = etc.

-i still find the prospect scary, that unless naming = conventions,
-including scaling, become standardized, someday ams = may receive a file
-to be processed for typesetter output, all the fonts = have names that
-are known locally, but some of them are based on = scaling conventions
-that weren't the same at ams and the originating = location when the
-fonts were generated.  please, someone, prove = to me i'm wrong!

Sorry, you're right. Remember how your cmss7 and my = cmss7 didn't
match since the AMS' version was done by hand and = mine was from
Sauter's algorithims. Ditto with the small cmcsc = fonts plus the
WSU extended CM for display sizes.

-(we've already had bad experience with the fonts from = one typesetter
-manufacturer, who shall remain nameless, where what = they called 10pt
-times, when compared with 10pt times from any other = source, was
-clearly larger -- in fact, almost certainly 11pt or = a bit larger.
-when mixed with garamond for titling, 14pt times = (linear scaling)
-turned out to be noticeably larger than 18pt = garamond!  try explaining
-*that* to the designer who's checking how well the = implementation
-adheres to the spec.!)

Such is the awful world of type sizes. For LaTeX's = sake, I
suggest we adopt the ec fonts when completed as the = default set
for LaTeX since those have built in parameterization = for other
sizes (I hope since this is the second time I've said = so).

-dh

------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.93501A54--