|
From: | Wols Lists |
Subject: | Re: Prefer luatex for documentation |
Date: | Mon, 21 Nov 2022 12:22:19 +0000 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.5.0 |
On 20/11/2022 15:05, Jean Abou Samra wrote:
Le 20/11/2022 à 15:40, Werner LEMBERG a écrit :I'm too tired to defend superior typographical output again and again since it is obviously only me who sees a benefit in it.It's not that I don't see any benefit at all in superior typographical output. However, the benefits are tiny in my view, and they need to weighed against all the other variables (maintenance, speed, ...) For sure, typography is more important *in comparison to those factors* to you than to me (and probably all other developers).
Sorry, I have to chip in here, and say "developers be damned!"Documentation is aimed at USERS. The quality of documentation is important (yes I know I might be an outlier, preferring to read/print pdf documentation). I'm very much on Werner's side - for production use, quality is EVERYTHING.
If luatex produces the best output, then it should be supported, and ideally be the default for non-developers. If you don't want to support three engines, ditch one of the other two, and if necessary make a config option that says "speed or quality?"
Cheers, Wol
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |