Re: blot_diameter

[Rune Zedeler]

Citat Juergen Reuter <address@hidden>:

> According to the recent discussion about blot_diameter, I tried to fix
> all font symbols that I contributed so far.  Still, I do not fully
> understand the concept.  Does blot_diameter only apply to convex
> edges?

Yes, I guess so.
The problem is that Han-Wen in a previous mail (back in december) wrote

* preferably no sharp inside angles.

but on the other hand he also wrote

* Have no clotting.

Theese two are in direct contradiction as visual clotting reduction is made by 
SHARPENING the inside angles. I guess that the first claim was a misthought 
from Han-Wen.

>  Does it only apply to the outline of a symbol?

No.

>  Does the
> concept of blot_diameter imply that lines always must have a width of
> at least blot_diameter?  What about penrazors, penstrokes and all the
> other MetaFont constructs that typically produce sharp edges?

Don't use them.
I think that my soft_penstroke macro produces fairly nice results - so I think 
that you could just use that instead.

> The attached patch is relative to my previous patch.

Hopefully this does not contradict with my feta-patch.
Is there a reason why you didn't apply that before doing your own changes?

-Rune