[tex-live] Offtopic: Metafont, Metapost spelling

[Taco Hoekwater]

Hi,

When I was the maintainer of “MetaPost", I tried hard to convince people to write it just like in this sentence. Not uppercase, and definitely not using any kind of logo font. I guess “Metapost” would be OK too, but “MetaPost” clearly had JD Hobby’s preference. 

MetaPost is somewhat like a contraction of the words Metafont and PostScript, and since PostScript is camel cased itself, it feels natural to mimic with that. 

Best wishes,
Taco

> On 14 Aug 2015, at 13:46, Zdenek Wagner <zdenek.wagner at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I personally prefer to use all uppercase variants. Texts written in TeX usually contains the corresponding logo. Alternatively I would suggest Metafont and Metapost, I do not see any reason for CamelCase here. But this is just my personal preference.
> 
> Zdeněk Wagner
> http://ttsm.icpf.cas.cz/team/wagner.shtml
> http://icebearsoft.euweb.cz
> 
> 2015-08-14 13:30 GMT+02:00 Manfred Lotz <manfred at dante.de>:
> Hi there,
> I'd like to know about proper (case wise) spelling of Metafont resp
> Metapost.
> 
> In CTAN catalogue files we have it all:  METAFONT, MetaFont and
> Metafont. Likewise for Metapost. IIRC, in PDF documents it is usually
> a METAFONT resp. METAPOST logo.
> 
> It is not about visibility on ctan.org as the CTAN portal transforms for
> instance Metafont to the proper logo. But  for the joy of consistency I
> like to straighten this out in our files.
> 
> Question: In our text based files which spelling should we choose?
> 
> Thanks all.
> 
> 
> --
> Manfred
>