[texhax] Possible problem exists with txfonts

Dr A K Hannaby keith_hannaby at mathshelp.com
Fri Mar 21 14:00:26 CET 2014

Contributors to the font discussion.

I am happy with the confirmation that at least two members from Tug have
been aware of some unintended spaces associated with the txfonts package.
One font that appears to me to be satisfactory is from the mathptmx package.
The suggested kpfonts package appears to be too ornate in style for math
I'm not sure how to acquire the newtx package which seems to gather no

-----Original Message-----
From: texhax [mailto:texhax-bounces at tug.org] On Behalf Of jfbu
Sent: 21 March 2014 12:37
To: texhax at tug.org
Subject: Re: [texhax] Possible problem exists with txfonts

le 21/03/2014 13:27 selon bnb at ams.org:
> On Fri, 21 Mar 2014, jfbu wrote:
>     [....]    
>     I don't see where is the bug, try this with and without txfonts.
>     \documentclass{article}
>     %\usepackage{txfonts}
>     \begin{document}
>     $XXXXXXXX$
>     $SSSSSSSS$
>     $UUUUUUUU$
>     $AAAAAAAA$
>     $CCCCCCCC$
>     \end{document}
>     To my eyes the X with Knuth's font is far worse than the S of txfonts.
> if you add a superscript after the letters, you will see why the S is 
> alleged to be too wide, compared to the X.

I concur, good point, thanks. And with a subscript too.

I am uneasy about both subscript and superscript placement in the case of
the X with the CM font, but that's order of magnitudes less a problem than
with S in the txfonts, and is more personal taste.



> this is a technical
> flaw, and has nothing to do with how one feels about the general 
> appearance of the alphabet styles.
> 						-- bb

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