Received: from webgate.proteosys.de (mail.proteosys-ag.com [62.225.9.49]) by lucy.proteosys (8.11.0/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id f1CJAkH21539 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:10:46 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1CJAkd30398 . for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:10:46 +0100 Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1CJAe721945 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:10:40 +0100 (MET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09527.8096BF00" Received: from mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.56]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA25558 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:10:40 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1CJAYM08719 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:10:39 +0100 (MET) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <1.4DDEE6F4@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:10:27 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 489035 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:07:25 +0100 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (mail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.234]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA16214 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:07:23 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA39858 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:07:24 +0100 Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1CJ7Ou03403 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:07:24 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.219] (helo=mrvdom03.kundenserver.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14SOJh-0005Jt-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:07:17 +0100 Received: from manz-3e3645e8.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.69.232] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom03.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14SOJb-00033t-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:07:11 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id UAA02774; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:05:00 +0100 In-Reply-To: References: <14983.4312.101767.632716@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Return-Path: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: insufficent NFSS model (?) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 20:04:59 +0100 Message-ID: <14984.13275.957442.490284@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Frank Mittelbach" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3863 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09527.8096BF00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Roozbeh, you wrote: > Please note that with different scripts, we have different font > classifications also. I'm not sure if the NFSS model is suitable for > scripts other than Latin, Cyrillic, and Greek (ok, there are some = others > here, like Armenian). i grant you that the way I developed the model was by looking at fonts = and their concepts available for languages close to Latin and so it is quite likely that it is not suitable for scripts which are quite different. However to be able to sensibly argue this I beg you to give us some = insight about these classifications and why you think NFSS would be unable to = model them (or say not really suitable) > At least I should do some changes to the model to > adapt to Persian. which? > And this situation, when you want different font > families for different scripts, is always the case with Persian. We = don't > have anything named Times, or Helvetica, etc. that's fine. I see no problem at all to model that the way I like to = implement future language support for LaTex. In fact I would have implemented the = whole thing last weekend if I wouldn't have got sidetracked :-) > We have our own families, > which usually doesn't fit in the model. again, how do they "not" fit the model. please give examples. thanks frank ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09527.8096BF00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: insufficent NFSS model (?)

Roozbeh,

you wrote:

 > Please note that with different scripts, we = have different font
 > classifications also. I'm not sure if the = NFSS model is suitable for
 > scripts other than Latin, Cyrillic, and = Greek (ok, there are some others
 > here, like Armenian).

i grant you that the way I developed the model was by = looking at fonts and
their concepts available for languages close to Latin = and so it is quite
likely that it is not suitable for scripts which are = quite different.

However to be able to sensibly argue this I beg you to = give us some insight
about these classifications and why you think NFSS = would be unable to model
them (or say not really suitable)

 > At least I should do some changes to the = model to
 > adapt to Persian.

which?

 > And this situation, when you want different = font
 > families for different scripts, is always = the case with Persian. We don't
 > have anything named Times, or Helvetica, = etc.

that's fine. I see no problem at all to model that the = way I like to implement
future language support for LaTex. In fact I would = have implemented the whole
thing last weekend if I wouldn't have got sidetracked = :-)

 > We have our own families,
 > which usually doesn't fit in the = model.

again, how do they "not" fit the model. = please give examples.

thanks
frank

------_=_NextPart_001_01C09527.8096BF00--