[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: `limitations' of OzTeX (was: fontinst with 8y.etx)
- To: Timothy Murphy <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: Re: `limitations' of OzTeX (was: fontinst with 8y.etx)
- From: Chris Rowley <C.A.Rowley@open.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jun 1998 23:46:36 +0100 (BST)
- In-Reply-To: <email@example.com>
- References: <199806171730.NAA09880@life.ai.mit.edu> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Sender: email@example.com
Timothy Murphy wrote --
> > Could we agree on terminology please? Can we call mapping numbers to
> > numbers (which is what OzTeX does and what VF can do) `REMAPPING'
> > and reserve the term `REENCODING' to assigning an encoding, which
> > is something that maps numbers to glyphs. The latter being more powerful
> > since it can make `unencoded' glyphs accessible.
> On the other hand VF is far more "powerful"
> since it allows inclusion of arbitrary DVI matter
> (eg combination of several glyphs)
> and is also recursive.
I am not sure I would desribe either as powerful: useful maybe (both).
But they are definitely mutually incomparable since they act on different
objects and so do different jobs.