[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: The syntax of \latinfamily
- To: Rebecca and Rowland <firstname.lastname@example.org>, Thierry Bouche <Thierry.Bouche@ujf-grenoble.fr>
- Subject: Re: The syntax of \latinfamily
- From: Lars Hellström <Lars.Hellstrom@math.umu.se>
- Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 16:40:32 +0100 (MET)
- Cc: email@example.com
- In-Reply-To: <199811131304.OAA03925@mozart.ujf-grenoble.fr>
>>Actually, this is only a special case of a more general situation: The user
>>specifies that glyphs (almost always symbols) that could not found in any
>>of the fonts in the font family should be taken from font #1, if they can
>>be found there. #1 could for example be psyr8r.
>Isn't this what the NFSS is for?
NFSS is no help to a fontinst user when generating the PLs and VPLs,
although it is likely to of great help in using the fonts generated with
LaTeX. With `user' I meant a fontinst user, as fontinst is the program
discussed. Besides, NFSS does only substitute entire fonts, which is of no
help here. LaTeX (the part in ltoutenc.dtx) can also substitute single
characters, but only when they do not appear in the current encoding, so
that is of no help here either. The glyphs from psyr would be used instead
of ``Missing glyph'' \specials, so TeX would only see different metrics (if
anything), but it would make all the difference to dvi driver.
You're quite right, I had a slip of thought there; fontinst wouldn't find
very many new symbols in an 8r-encoded psyr. psyr (no encoding specified)
should work fine, though.