[NTG-context] itemize[n] and dejavu fonts

Alan BRASLAU alan.braslau at cea.fr
Tue Apr 7 14:16:28 CEST 2015


On Tue, 7 Apr 2015 13:37:54 +0200
Wolfgang Schuster <schuster.wolfgang at gmail.com> wrote:

> Can you show your output from the example and tell what you expect
> from the fit option.

For example:

\setupbodyfont [scola,10pt]
\startitemize [n]
...

yields a reasonable output:
10. X

\setupbodyfont [dejavu,10pt]
\startitemize [n]
...

the output is ugly:
10.X
where the period and the X almost touch.

AND if one goes to 100 items, then result is
100.X
where the 0 and the X overlap
(the period is in the right foot of the X).

Using the scola font, the result with 100 is similar to the result with
10 in dejavu, so going to a fourth digit would be just as horrible as
with three digits and dejavu.

\setupbodyfont [whatever]
\startitemize[n,fit]
yields
10.X
with no spacing in all fonts, and this is pretty ugly unless one also
specifies [distance=\spaceamount]. Perhaps this correct (with
distance=, by default) as fit should then fit with no spacing.

HOWEVER,
\startitemize [n]
with no other options should simply work correctly "out of the box" for
all fonts and not give such horrible results.

I understand now: the default is a fixed offset to the list body that
works OK for small itemizations (i.e. one digit) with most fonts and
more-or-less well with two digits, but not with dejavu. Choosing the
option "fit" and setting a "distance" gives a reasonable result, so we
cannot call this a bug, but the result by default is rather surprising.
Notice that \startitemize[R] works poorly with even less than 10 items.

May I suggest that the default spacing (i.e. the list setup) that is
used be enlarged a little bit, as two digit numbered itemizations are
not rare and dejavu is such a useful font. Indeed, this is obtained
with the option "broad". Indeed, in "the manual", broad (and
2*broad) is used in such examples. Perhaps the fixed spacing that is
presently tuned works well with simple symbol item lists and passably
with single digit numbered lists, which probably explains why this is
the default. Also, I suppose that there is some aesthetic value in
having item lists take a fixed, uniform distance by default in a
document which is why "fit" is not a default option. Thus, a design
choice (or compromise).

Moral: read the manual!

Alan
-- 
Alan Braslau
CEA DSM-IRAMIS-SPEC
CNRS URA 2464
Orme des Merisiers
91191 Gif-sur-Yvette cedex FRANCE
tel: +33 1 69 08 73 15
fax: +33 1 69 08 87 86
mailto:alan.braslau at cea.fr


More information about the ntg-context mailing list