LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Thierry Bouche <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 3 Mar 1999 16:36:11 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
 i'm not sure i agree on the split for the series attribute. and it doesn't
 really origins in the CM history --- it does origin in "Methods of Book
 design" by Hugh Wiliamson.

interesting info, thanks. i stand corrected.

 one idea with the axis' or attributes was that it should be desirable (and
 sensible) to change individual attributes while retaining al others. Now i
 claim that there is not much argument for changing individually width but
 retaining weight or the other way around

That's a point.  Here is a (maybe bad--tell me) counterexample: I
define an abstract environment as a noarrower column using some narrow
sansserif font. Within this environment, I want to be able to typeset
anything that could be in the text, including weight variants. Another
similar use: in a bilingual (?)  document, i keep the translation in a
narrow version of the font, everything else affected by the same font
variations. Well, yes : my examples could be easily treated by
declaring a xx-narrow family, rather than having width & weight
separated. My problem is on the practical/genericity of the markup
side. something like \fontfamily{\f@family n} is, i believe, very
fragile.


I see that your
 i mean proper classes (not a generic one like article et al) can't cater for
 more than a single font set anyway, can it?

breaks my argument as well...

Thierry Bouche, Grenoble.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2