On Wed, Jul 05, 2023 at 04:43:56PM +0200, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 7/5/2023 3:18 PM, Carlos wrote:
\showmakeup on \TeX\ shows a
tSP:3.282 THK:-1.721 H__E X HK:-1.291 SP:3.282
no MWE includes so clueless
\starttypescript[mylucidaserif] \definefontsynonym[LucidaBrightRegular] [file:LucidaBrightRegular] \definefontsynonym[LucidaBrightItalic] [file:LucidaBrightItalic] \definefontsynonym[LucidaBrightDemiBold] [file:LucidaBrightDemiBold] \definefontsynonym[LucidaBrightDemiItalic] [file:LucidaBrightDemiItalic] \stoptypescript \starttypescript [mylucidaserif] \setups[font:fallback:serif] \definefontsynonym[Serif] [LucidaBrightRegular] [features=default] \definefontsynonym[SerifItalic] [LucidaBrightItalic] [features=default] \definefontsynonym[SerifBold] [LucidaBrightDemiBold] [features=default] \definefontsynonym[SerifBoldItalic] [LucidaBrightDemiItalic] [features=default] \stoptypescript \starttypescript[mylucidasans] \definefontsynonym[LucidaSansRegular] [file:LucidaSansRegular] \definefontsynonym[LucidaSansOblique] [file:LucidaSansOblique] \definefontsynonym[LucidaSansDemiBold] [file:LucidaSansDemiBold] \stoptypescript \starttypescript[mylucidasans] \setups[font:fallback:sans] \definefontsynonym[Sans] [LucidaSansRegular] [features=default] \definefontsynonym[LucidaSansItalic] [LucidaSansOblique] [features=default] \definefontsynonym[LucidaSansSansBold] [LucidaSansDemiBold] [features=default] \stoptypescript \starttypescript [mylucidaserif] \definetypeface [mylucidaserif] [rm] [serif] [mylucidaserif] [default] \definetypeface [mylucidaserif] [ss] [sans] [mylucidasans] [default] \stoptypescript \setupbodyfont[mylucidaserif] %\setupbodyfont[mylucidasans] %\setupbodyfont[14pt] \starttext Thus, I came to the conclusion that the designer of a new system must not only be the implementer and first large||scale user; the designer should also write the first user manual. The separation of any of these four components would have hurt \TeX\ significantly. If I had not participated fully in all these activities, literally hundreds of improvements would never have been made, because I would never have thought of them or perceived why they were important. But a system cannot be successful if it is too strongly influenced by a single person. Once the initial design is complete and fairly robust, the real test begins as people with many different viewpoints undertake their own experiments. \stoptext
I assume that SP stands for space. Correct me if I'm wrong
After reading some of the manuals that mention \showmakeup with and without [spaces] and so forth, I couldn't find any more info related to this.
If anyone can provide me more information as to what does HK means there?
horizontal kern
thanks (sorry for duplicate messages. sending out to mailing list works sporadically Sometimes works, other times doesn't).
Anyhow
If I were to have, say, a control _word_ such as \TeX\, the sequence of TeX kerning is thrown off. The only remedy would be to have a a \qquad preceding the control sequence e.g., {\qquad \TeX\ significantly} to sort of ameliorate this side-effect. But then again. Spacing is off. e.g.,
no MWE so a space cam come from anywhwere
The separation of any of these four components would have hurt {\qquad\TeX\ significantly}. If I had not participated fully in
x{\showmakeup[glue]x\qquad x}x
imo \qquad is okay
But it's interesting that \showmakeup, kerning and spaces would display what's to be expected. And yet, the aformentioned set of
tSP:3.282 THK:-1.721 H__E X HK:-1.291 SP:3.282
is accurate nevertheless. And a very nice implementation at that, but one I fear can't be included on a final document either.
With that being said, the introduction of a \qquad, in addition to \showmakeup with, say, redundancy aside, whatever is preceding the \TeX\ alongside the file would also introduce a space where no space was ever there before.
Because of all of this, and unfortunately, \showmakeup is not quite helpful here either. Although it does so displays the amount of spaces and so forth, any addition of a \qquad also adds a very subtle unwanted space.
qquad is not that subtle: 2em
And since we're looking here, I pressume, solely for accuracy and perfection, we're left here with neither: zero, zip. It evaporates. puzzled
Dear Emily: I'm still confused as to what groups articles should be posted to. How about an example? -- Still Confused
Dear Still:
can we omit these confusing additions in mails to the list? looks / sounds like a 'bot' to me
Hans
----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/ wiki : https://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
-- Imagine that Cray computer decides to make a personal computer. It has a 150 MHz processor, 200 megabytes of RAM, 1500 megabytes of disk storage, a screen resolution of 4096 x 4096 pixels, relies entirely on voice recognition for input, fits in your shirt pocket and costs $300. What's the first question that the computer community asks? "Is it PC compatible?"