<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Axel E. Retif wrote:<br>
</div>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:923c765a-9b75-c072-ce96-3a182de80375@gmail.com">What is
important is a), the baseline, because in confronted pages one
last line can have descenders (p, q, etc.) and the other no
descenders at all ---what the eye sees as bottom of the pages are
the baselines (the x, serifs of m, n, etc., not the serifs of the
descenders of p's and q's). That's why in displayed formulas at
the bottom of a page (La)TeX sets the sum signs at the baseline,
but protrudes down integrals a little bit. <br>
<br>
Please bear in mind that I said “what is important is the
baseline” ---to set the height of a page, for example with the
geometry package, one should use a multiple of the baselines;
let's say, if one is typesetting 11:13, the height of the page
should be a multiple of 13 (in points, of course). <br>
</blockquote>
<br>
But if and only if, descenders are allowed to intrude into the lower
margin. I am sure that you and Peter are making the same point but
from different perspectives. Peter as taking as a given the book
designer's specification for page height, and then (effectively)
going on to say that only when one knows both the page height AND
whether the book designer will allow descenders to intrude into the
lower margin can one know whether the baseline of the last line of
the page should coincide with the margin or must be set higher by
the depth of the deepest descender that one is expecting to
encounter. You (Axel) are, I think, taking TeX's default behaviour
as your starting point, and they are very different perspectives.
If the book designer says "descenders may not intrude into the lower
margin", then TeX's default behaviour may have to be over-ridden,
one reason for the existence of the \maxdepth parameter.<br>
<br>
<i>** Phil.</i><br>
</body>
</html>