LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Forum View

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

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

Print Reply
Will Robertson <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 28 Nov 2006 08:46:06 +1030
text/plain (37 lines)
On 28/11/2006, at 0:35 , Frank Mittelbach wrote:

> why do you want to have an intermediate layer? basically to allow  
> for easy
> configuration changes and flexibility. it is the old story: unless  
> you build a
> common exchange layer modification is more than painful.

Good thinking, as always, Frank.
I guess my feeling about the whole thing is that fontspec  
incorporates the "user level" functionality of the NFSS fairly well.  
As long as people are using it properly (and I admit more should have  
been done to enforce this) in the first place then font definitions  
can be swapped out in the preamble, and intermediate commands  
\bfseries, \itshape are used in the document to ensure consistency.

It's a bit of a mix between your choices 1 and 2. Font features are  
specified through the consistent fontspec interface, (not that the  
OpenType feature interface isn't consistent of itself; just ugly) but  
font names must be used explicitly, and bold/italic fonts aren't  
always auto-detected.

For example,

   Numbers = OldStyle,
   BoldFont = Hoefler Text Bold,
     ]{Hoefler Text}

The Numbers feature will work for any font that supports that  
feature, but it can never be completely automatic to set up an entire  
font family -- the user needs to know what the font names are, and  
what features it supports. This is true whether or not the interface  
is provided through an intermediate stage or directly.