Wed, 14 Feb 2001 16:49:46 +0330
On Wed, 14 Feb 2001, Lars Hellström wrote:
> But that's not the NFSS, is it? The NFSS is the classification and
> selection of fonts using the encoding/family/series/shape/size model,
> \rmfamily and friends belong to a higher level of font selection. (I've
> called it the "author level" in some previous mail long ago.)
That's not NFSS, I know. I only wanted to say that there are differences
with the font model (between what I've seen and read in the TeX world, and
what happens here). I do not know exactly about the situation in Latin
> This could use some clarification. Is iranic like the latin italic but
> leaning the other way (negative italic slant)? (Please confirm or correct.)
"real iranic" (that's really what designers say when they're talking) is
somehow like the latin italics, but leaning to left. "iranic" is like
latin slanted, but leaning to left.
> Could one say that cmff is an iranic font?
No, iranic is only used for the Arabic script. Something like cmff
will be called backslanted.
> As for being distinct families,
> how are the iranic/italic fonts used? For emphasizing, like italic, or for
They are used for emphasis, yes.
> NFSS classifies outline as a shape, and thus shaded-outline should be a
> shape as well.
I know. I wanted to tell that it is not considered a shape here, because
people use it the same way they use boldface. They may ask for an
"Azin/outline/slanted/14", and will never ask for a