X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1381" "Wed" "16" "April" "1997" "12:57:33" "+0200" "Hans Aberg" "haberg@MATEMATIK.SU.SE" nil "34" "Re: Alternatives to LaTeX (Was Some comments...)" "^Date:" nil nil "4" nil nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP id MAA19638; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:57:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from listserv.gmd.de by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <15.37CF33FA@listserv.gmd.de>; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:57:35 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 125663 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:57:31 +0200 Received: from mail.nada.kth.se (root@mail.nada.kth.se [130.237.222.92]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.7.6/8.7.4) with ESMTP id MAA22117 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:57:27 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.37.92] (sl109.modempool.kth.se [130.237.37.135]) by mail.nada.kth.se (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id MAA23678 for ; Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:57:18 +0200 (MET DST) X-Sender: su95-hab@mail.nada.kth.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:57:33 +0200 From: Hans Aberg Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: Alternatives to LaTeX (Was Some comments...) Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1952 Sebastian Rahtz write: > > Is there not a problem here: PostScript fonts may only come in one size, > > which then is rescaled. > > > > But in correct typesetting, as in TeX fonts, the weights and proportions > > actually change with the font size. > > > > So how does that work out here? > >um, this is what i would call a canard. we have known this since the >first uses of PS fonts in TeX (I did my first book in LaTeX with Times >in 1986). its a fact of life that most PS fonts only come in 10 pt >size. Some have other sizes. Many Computer Modern fonts have a range >of sizes, some have more than others. > >99% of the typesetting world gets by fine with the (technically >perhaps inferior) optical-scaling-plus-hints of Type1 fonts. >I suggest there are more productive things to worry about I think Springer Verlag uses TeX in part because it produces the right thing. So I think simply using rescaled fonts would produce inferior technical typesetting. I would label PS as a "page description" language, whereas TeX is a "typesetting" language. PS admits correct fonts typesetting, but the programs used to produce PS output defaults to the simplification of using merely font rescaling. So I do not think this is a minor issue, when it comes down to TeX; this is in fact something that really makes TeX typesetting. Hans Aberg