[lucida] Lucida fontset nits
Michael H. Prager
Mike.Prager at noaa.gov
Fri Nov 24 17:21:06 CET 2006
Lucida users--
Colleagues and I have been using the Lucida font set (originally from
Y&Y) for close to 10 years now. We appreciate the variety and legibility
of the family. Still, a few nits have been bothering us:
- The mathematical overmarks (hat, bar, tilde, check, ...) are too
small. They are difficult to distinguish when one is using the same
variable with various overmarks.
- In some formulas, subscripts are not low enough, potentially leading
to confusion. This has led us to use such constructions as $a^{}_b$ to
push the subscripts down a little further.
Those are the only issues I can think of right now, but because of the
general excellence of the fonts (and the scarcity of comparable sets),
those issues stand out.
When I brought this up on comp.text.tex, Karl Berry replied:
>> Low subscripts are a function of the TeX metrics, not anything in
what B&H did. It could possibly be changed, but I fear changing the
typesetting of existing documents. Maybe post a note to lucida at tug.org
to see what others think?
>> As for the too-small accents, I think it's true that B&H don't want
to spend more time on these existing fonts. However, again it could be
played with in TeX, one way or another, but the same compatibility
issues arise. <<
So what *do* others think? Are these nits troublesome enough, and is
potential for problems with existing documents small enough, that
changes would be worth making? I know that I would vote FOR such changes.
Mike Prager
--
Michael Prager, Ph.D.
Senior Scientist
NOAA Southeast Fisheries Science Center
Beaufort, North Carolina 28516
http://www.sefsc.noaa.gov/mprager/
** Opinions expressed are personal, not official. No
** official endorsement of any product is made or implied.
More information about the lucida
mailing list