RE: Comments on _Réflexions_ so far

[Robert Keeble <RKeeble@xxxxxxxxx>]

> » caps are not available is interesting, but how many people 
> like and use MM
> » fonts?
> 
> they're waiting for correct support in software!

OK, I asked for that. %^)

> » essentially a virtual font that allows specifying harmonious "real"
> » fonts
> 
> I think we discussed that issue somwhere at length, with TeX's VF as a
> guideline. This is a very _practical_ workaround as long as we don't
> have a huge collection of Unicode++ fonts (Unicode++ = Unicode + all
> typographer's glyphs like in adobe's glyph list

I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean you're worried about having "Unicode
fonts" that are huge, because they have glyphs for many or most of the
Uni-codepoints -? 

> 
> » p.8 Superscript/subscript
> » It sounds like the conversation is mainly about typesetting formulas
> 
> Not really. Having the ability to place arbitrary text at an arbitrary
> spot on the page (defined absolutely or relatively to current text
> flow) may be very handy for some works (avant-garde poetry,
> experimental typography). Our idea was that if there were kernel
> support for that, then a formula plug-in could be much more simple and
> integrated to the general interface.
> 

What is interesting is that with a general-purpose layout engine, placing
text like this might not be that hard...you're just breaking some text into
smaller runs that contain position information. The layout engine might be
freed from doing things like justification, if it was in the context of a
free-form text layout box. Would you need both linked boxes and
free-form/freely placed text in the same box/story? 
I think designing a good interface would be the harder task. Would it be
better to enter text as small groups, or break up an existing block of text
by selecting runs, designating it a 'group', and dragging it around? How
would you show that a run of text is a group without cluttering the view? 

> 
> » p.11 Crénage
> » The point is made that kerning doesn't work between 
> different fonts, or even
> » different sizes in the same face. But why is automatic kerning still
> » desirable in this case? 
> 
> J'ai donné des exemples : complément expert, alternates, swash

Gotcha, I should have thought of that, but they don't let me buy "extra"
fonts for my computer.

> » p.13 (F.H. Villebrod) On devrait même pouvoir enregistrer 
> des tableaux de
> » crénage différents selon le corps utilisé...
> » 
> » So the kerning does not scale correctly and tracking 
> doesn't help either?
> 
> I call that « optical spacing » as a cheap alternative to actual
> different optical sizes. Better to use MM fonts, of course, but
> tracking yields too often uneven spacing, no?

Well, I guess that's for you typographers to judge. I have the jaded eye of
a developer! But seriously, a larger instance of a MM font is preferable to
a scaled non-MM font?


Rob Keeble