[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fontinst modifications
- To: Ulrik Vieth <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Fontinst modifications
- From: Rebecca and Rowland <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 15:37:12 +0100
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- In-Reply-To: <199806041020.MAA04020@attila.uni-duesseldorf.de>
- References: <26-Thu04Jun1998110530firstname.lastname@example.org> (messagefrom Sebastian Rahtz on Thu, 4 Jun 1998 11:05:30 +0100)
At 12:20 pm +0200 4/6/98, Ulrik Vieth wrote:
>>> Anyway, I thought that working on the docs was Rowland's job.
>> I thought Rowland was working on a *new* doc, not a revision of the
>> current guide....
>Based on all his question about details, I'm really confused as to
>what kind of doc he's going to write. Let him answer this himself.
I'm trying to write a beginners' guide to *using* fontinst, rather than
detailed documentation on exactly how it works for hackers. The current
fontinst documentation is only comprehensible to hackers, and is probably
quite good enough for anyone really interested in its internal workings.
I'm intending that what I'm writing will be a complement for the current
docs rather than a replacement.
Of course, a beginners' guide to something like fontinst is a non-trivial
thing to write: the job it does is rather involved, so you've got to learn
about loads of stuff before even trivial use of \latinfamily makes any
sense at all.