Re: [Texmacs-dev] proper underline

[TeXmacs]

Hi Max,

Yes, I have also been thinking about this problem, which is quite tricky.
There are various difficulties:

  - If we want things to print nicely, then we need a vectorial solution.
    So if we do pixel magic, it must still be vectorial pixel magic.

  - It is problematic if to fatten our fonts using the background color,
    since the background might be a pattern or we might painting on top
    of something else.

  - What should underlining do on more complex markup (a fraction,
    a text with a subscript or superscript, etc.)?

Or do we simply sacrifice some of the things that we might want?

Best wishes, --Joris



On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 10:08:21PM +0100, Massimiliano Gubinelli wrote:
> Dear all,
> 
>  I'm not very fond of the \underline style in TeXmacs. Even some browsers 
> (e.g. Safari) do better, in particular put the line nearer to the glyphs and 
> take into account descenders (e.g. "g" or "p"). 
> 
> TeX has similar problems and there are solutions around, e.g. here:
> 
> https://alexwlchan.net/2017/10/latex-underlines/
> 
> Also some CSS trickery can do something for most of the browsers:
> 
> https://css-tricks.com/styling-underlines-web/
> 
> I've experimented with similar solutions for TeXmacs. Using \superpose, 
> \datom and \thicken one can indeed create the wanted underline and it works 
> also on the generated PDF file, however \datom does not interact properly 
> with \superpose and one cannot have multiline underlines...
> 
> Is there a way to make this work?
> 
> I attach a file with my experiments and tentative implementation. (the colors 
> are used to debug)
> 
> Best
> Max
> 
> 
> 



> _______________________________________________
> Texmacs-dev mailing list
> Texmacs-dev@gnu.org
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/texmacs-dev