## LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

#### View:

 Message: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Topic: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] By Author: [ First | Previous | Next | Last ] Font: Proportional Font

Subject:

Re: inputenc text (and/or math)

From:

Date:

Fri, 9 Feb 2001 17:43:56 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

 text/plain (39 lines)
 » If I understand it correctly, Tschichold recommentds only old-style » digits for text (he calls them text digits as different from titling » digits). Therefore I think that in the tradition of old school there » should be difference between '3's in the phrase » In Chapter~3 we will show that $\pi>3$. Nope. The really old tradition did know nothing about lining (also called "english" in France ;-) digits, anything used old style, which you still can see in the scan of a rather recent book by H. Cartan I posted somewhere in page of the Latex navigator. There have been modern attempts to do what you're refering to. (I had a vote about the 3 possible styles, but I cannot make statistics about the voter's taste, as they were so few -- you can have a look at http://www-fourier.ujf-grenoble.fr/~bouche/tex/mathtests/OS-ornot-OS-e.html if you have some spare time to loose...) » Also, the command \MakeUppercase should take care of this » distinction, because old-style digits are actually *lowercase*, and » must be converted to upper case when, e.g. in running heads. yep. this is easily done by adding a family switch to \MakeUppercase. One more reason for a case' axis in NFSS, but one more complexity (you would need families with varying letter-cases and fixed figures-cases + all other possibilities round...) » What do other people think of this? I think that you're point is one point in a myriad of possibilities. If you replace must' by could' in your discussion, I heartily agree with you, but notice that what you describe is easily done with current latex (redefine most \the, \MakeUpperLower-case, etc.) Thierry Bouche __   « Ils vivent pour vivre, et nous, hélas ! nous vivons pour savoir. »                                 Charles Baudelaire, Paris.`