[texhax] Line width and 66 characters per line

Lars Madsen daleif at imf.au.dk
Wed Aug 27 17:43:05 CEST 2014

Hi Jim the following source links does not work, several names was changes in the catalogue recently because of legal  issues


Palle mentioned this in a posting on the FB page Aug 21:

Due to legal issues some fonts and pages have been renamed in the Catalogue.

New Century Schoolbook → URW Schoolbook L
Palatino → URW Palladio
Times → URW Nimbus Roman
Arial → URW A030
Avantgarde → URW Gothic
Helvetica → URW Nimbus Sans
Optima → URW Classico
Zapf Chancery → URW Chancery

/Lars Madsen
Institut for Matematik / Department of Mathematics
Aarhus Universitet / Aarhus University
Mere info: http://au.dk/daleif@imf / More information: http://au.dk/en/daleif@imf

From: texhax [texhax-bounces at tug.org] on behalf of Hefferon, James S. [jhefferon at smcvt.edu]
Sent: 27 August 2014 17:25
To: texhax at tug.org
Subject: [texhax] Line width and 66 characters per line

I've often heard that when laying out a document we should try to set the line length so the number of characters per line comes out close to 66.  For each of the entries on the page with fonts having LaTeX math support http://www.tug.dk/FontCatalogue/mathfonts.html I produced a sample document using that font. Each has its line width set so that with this font, lines average 66 characters.

But these graphics all look way too narrow to me.   In particular, I note that the Computer Modern Roman line width I found of a bit less than 300pt is a lot less than the default LaTeX line width or 345pt, which looks about right to me.  So that folks can see what I mean without making an overlong post here I put up a temporary page at http://joshua.smcvt.edu/linewidth .  It has graphics of all the font samples and some more explanation of what I did.

I'd be grateful for opinions: Do the samples all look too narrow to others? Or is my judgement just not good?  (Of course, I apologize if this is widely known.  I've not heard it discussed before but I may have just missed it.  I also apologize if I've got something wrong, and if so I'd appreciate being corrected.)

Thank you,
Jim Hefferon

He's had a rough summer.
                    -- Theresa Lisbon
TeX FAQ: http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
Mailing list archives: http://tug.org/pipermail/texhax/
More links: http://tug.org/begin.html

Automated subscription management: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/texhax
Human mailing list managers: postmaster at tug.org

More information about the texhax mailing list