[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Tue, 6 Dec 1994 15:05:20 +0000 (GMT)
On Tue, 6 Dec 1994, rodrigo vanegas wrote:
> > ]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?
the tex fonts (computer modern) are pd, and you are welcome
to use them. although they were available originally
only as bit maps, they are now also widely available
as postscript fonts. try your friendly neighbourhood ctan
(probably under fonts somewhere). does this go against
the spirit of lout though? the `beauty' (sic) of lout
is that it works with the default 13 postscript fonts.
malcolm clark tel: (+44) 01203 523365
computing services fax: (+44) 01203 523267
university of warwick url: http://www.warwick.ac.uk/~cudax/egotrip.html
coventry, cv4 7al, uk email: address@hidden
golden rule: whoever has the gold, rules