On Fri, 30 Dec 2005, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
It surely is better to use modules unless Hans ads the definitions to the core, but in my opinion there must be a way to surround the definitions with \starttypescript.Don't ask me how.
Hello Mojca, it works, if the file is saved as "type-loc.tex", but then it's loaded for every user and I prefer to control, when it's loaded. It works then with "\starttypescript [mono] [computer-modern] [size]", "\starttypescript [cmttbf] [computer-modern] [size]" was just one of my hopeless tries ;)
But there are at least two other problems with the file (so there must be a cleaner way): - I would like to use LM wherever possible, but now even for normal \sc the CM fonts are used.
I get lmr for normal caps in your example.
You can use the (lmcsc10 instead of cmcsc10) directly or create a synonym from cmr to lmr (already defined somewhere), but since it works OK here, I cannot test the wrong behaviour.
When I use "lmcsc10" instead of cmcsc10, I get: ERROR: I can't find file `lmcsc10'. --- TeX said --- <*> ...=ljfzzz; mag:=1; nonstopmode; input lmcsc10 That's the reason, why I thought that cm was used instead of lm... But anyway, it's not so important, since the fonts look the same.
The most weird thing is that you mix two different encodings within the same file.
Yes, you're right! Just some explanation: Some time ago, I tried out utf with my editor and wrote some modules (t-construction-plan.tex and t-french.tex). But afterwards for some reasons I switched back to il9. The header of the new modules got copied and pasted from the older utf-modules, but since I work with il9 today, the rest is il9. I didn't change the header, because in any way I will switch all my stuff to utf in some weeks, today I'm just in a transitional phase... ;)
Mojca (no need to answer my stupid remarks)
Why are they stupid? Cheers, Peter -- http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/