[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Tue, 06 Dec 1994 09:34:21 -0500
> ]I must say, the equations in the manual distributed with Lout are not
> ]really up to snuff, at least compared to TeX. I would use Lout, since
> ]TeX seems awfully kludgy to me, except for this important point. The
> ]integral signs, for instance, are straight vertical and have ugly ends,
> ]rather than the graceful curves of TeX, and the square root doesn't close
> ]up correctly. Is somebody working on this? I know it's difficult, but
> ]it's necessary.
> It would be difficult to fix in Lout without a *lot* of work. The
> mathematical symbols in TeX were carefully hand-drawn, and a lot of
> work went into working out positioning very precisely so that the
> spacing was ideal for the math font.
> In Lout, we're using the symbols from the Adobe fonts. To get TeX like
> results, we'd have to hand-design a new math font, and work out the
> positioning to get it right.
Isn't TeX itself public domain? Couldn't we simply *take* these fonts
for ourselves, giving credit where its due, and do only the
Lout-specific work thereafter?
- Equations, thursto1, 1994/12/05
- Re: Equations, Mark C. Chu-Carroll, 1994/12/06
- Re: Equations,
rodrigo vanegas <=