[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
** Opinions expressed are personal, not official.  No
** official endorsement of any product is made or implied.

More information about the lucida mailing list