[texhax] dotfill leaders on first line of paragraph only ?

Reinhard Kotucha reinhard.kotucha at web.de
Sat Dec 10 00:11:26 CET 2011

On 2011-12-08 at 19:29:38 -0500, Pierre MacKay wrote:

 > On 12/8/2011 10:55 AM, William Adams wrote:
 > > On Dec 7, 2011, at 9:29 PM, Pierre MacKay wrote:
 > >

 > >> I have had to set up journal covers with various solid-color
 > >> PANTONE effects to supply limited scope colored fonts in
 > >> different colors, It may be a bit of a nuisance to limit the
 > >> scope on every limited color change, but it certainly saves a
 > >> lot of headaches.  In addition, if I have any color other than
 > >> (cmyk 0 0 0 1) for the principal font over several pages, I
 > >> renew it by using Tom Rokicki's bophook and eophook on every
 > >> page (mostly to set yet another gsave . . . grestore scope and
 > >> avoid the risk of falling into a (cmyk 0 0 0 1) default color
 > >> hole).  \begingroup . . . \endgroup scoping may well be needed
 > >> too, but it is not meaningful to PostScript.
 > >>
 > >> Printers often insist on a named PANTONE ink that they happen to
 > > use regularly.  The above in the context of pdf(la)tex?
 > >
 > > AFAIK one can't do readily do spot color inks in XeTeX (which is
 > > what Philip is using).
 > >
 > > I'd love to be wrong though.
 > >
 > > William
 > >
 > Spot color specification should be done through a \special..  It is
 > entirely managed by PostScript, not by any part of Tex.  So long as
 > you output DVI and then go through dvips and some distiller such as
 > ps2pdf, I can see no reason why the flavor of *TeX would get in the
 > way. One more reason to treasure DVI as an output format.

I'm not *that* convinced.  XeTeX already uses an extended DVI format
and in order to fully support Thành's microtypographic extensions it
probably has to be extended even further.

Given that you can pass something to a PostScript interpreter through a
\special, I don't see any reason why it can't passed to a PDF file
through \pdfliteral or the like.

Pierre, I know that you share my opinion about the beauty of
PostScript.  Hence no lengthy discussions required.

Since TeX engines support PDF directly, supporting PostScript became
more and more inconvenient.  But for LuaTeX users there is a bright
star at the horizon:


It's a fully fledged PostScript interpreter written in Lua.  I tried
it today and it works like a charm.  Even the source code is beautiful.
Of course, it makes most sense to use it with LuaTeX, but LuaTeX is
the future anyway.


Reinhard Kotucha                                      Phone: +49-511-3373112
Marschnerstr. 25
D-30167 Hannover                              mailto:reinhard.kotucha at web.de
Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO.

More information about the texhax mailing list