X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["962" "Fri" "18" "April" "1997" "13:45:55" "+0100" "Sebastian Rahtz" "s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK" nil "21" "Re: Alternatives to LaTeX" "^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 OAA22353; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 14:46:18 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from listserv.gmd.de by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <14.BC0EE9A0@listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 14:46:17 +0200
Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
          (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 127250 for
          LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 14:46:11 +0200
Received: from pillar.elsevier.co.uk (root@pillar.elsevier.co.uk
          [193.131.222.35]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.7.6/8.7.4) with
          ESMTP id OAA15975 for <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>; Fri, 18
          Apr 1997 14:46:05 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from snowdon.elsevier.co.uk (snowdon.elsevier.co.uk
          [193.131.197.164]) by pillar.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP
          id NAA25177 for <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>; Fri, 18 Apr
          1997 13:43:24 +0100 (BST)
Received: from cadair.elsevier.co.uk by snowdon.elsevier.co.uk with SMTP (PP);
          Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:46:05 +0100
Received: from lochnagarn.elsevier.co.uk (lochnagarn.elsevier.co.uk
          [193.131.216.1]) by cadair.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id
          NAA25725 for <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>; Fri, 18 Apr 1997
          13:45:58 +0100 (BST)
Received: (from srahtz@localhost) by lochnagarn.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) id
          NAA17436; Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:45:55 +0100 (BST)
References: <v02130503af7d150257d6@[130.237.37.109]>
Message-ID:  <199704181245.NAA17436@lochnagarn.elsevier.co.uk>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
In-Reply-To:  <v02130503af7d150257d6@[130.237.37.109]>
Date:         Fri, 18 Apr 1997 13:45:55 +0100
From: Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Subject:      Re: Alternatives to LaTeX
Status: R
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 1998

 > you claiming I do that, but Computer Modern and TeX were originally
 > developed as a matching pair.
I have diverged from people my own age to whom i was close 35 years
ago...

 >   So do you think that the extra math fonts metric added in the Y&Y AFM
 > files for Lucida Math is sufficient for a good TeX or LaTeX font, I mean so
 > that people who normally just writes manuscripts could just flip it

They do so, in their thousands.  Y&Y's market is discerning scientific
publishers and authors, and their selling point is high quality math,
both CMR and Lucida. I don't want to plug Y&Y particularly, but they
demonstrate that you can develop and market good math fonts for use
with TeX. The LaTeX PSNFSS package has extensive support for
Lucida. Of course, real purists will find stuff to carp about in
Lucida, and scaled fonts, but does anyone seriously suggest it isnt a
serious math typesetting face?

this discussion isnt going anywhere...

sebastian