Re: tx fonts [Re: [Texmacs-dev] txexa font]

[Nix N. Nix]

On Tue, 2003-05-13 at 09:51, Joris van der Hoeven wrote:
> > Well, there is a definition of over/underbrace in LaTeX preceded by a
> > comment saying something to the effect of "use txexa#32 instead of a
> > \hbox".  Also, it seems to work fine in LaTeX, that is,
> >
> > \braceld\bracext...\bracext\braceru\bracelu\bracext...\bracext\bracerd
> >
> > lines up perfectly.
> 
> Also when using dpi=2400?

I don't know.  For the above LaTeX code I just do

pdflatex filename.tex
acroread filename.pdf

and zoom in to 1600%, and it still looks OK.

How do I check (where do I specify) dpi=2400 ?

> 
> > It looks like txexa#32 was /designed/ to work with cmex#122-125.
> 
> This is strange; one would rather expect txexa#32 to be designed
> for working with txex#122-125, which look slightly different as
> cmex#122-125...

I suppose so.  Maybe it works with both.  However, in LaTeX, AFAICT,
cmex#122-125 are used for the extremities, and txexa#32 (or a deprecated
\hbox) are used for the extension.

Can you import txex#122-125 into TeXmacs ?  We can try the horizontal
brace extremities from both fonts then and see which ones look better. 
Too bad there's no "cmexa" font with a horizontal brace extension.