rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) (06/24/89)
In article <159@unmvax.unm.edu>, brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu (Walt Brainerd) writes: . . .[stuff deleted] > A feature we have not implemented, but think desirable is font families, > so that switching to _italic_ means italic of the current font family, > for example. Could you elaborate? Why is this hard, or more to the point, why does it take a mod to troff? Seems that what you want is a command to set a new font family by some name selection; it needs to do some .fp's to get the new fonts mounted where they belong (perhaps in all environments, depending on what you think it should mean). This ought to be easy with a macro. I've done it the lazy way, as in: .de FF \" set font family (hides naming ugliness) .if '\\$1'T' .F} R I B BI .if '\\$1'H' .F} H HO HB HD .if '\\$1'P' .F} PA PI PB PX .if '\\$1'NC' .F} nc nC Nc NC etc.--these are the TranScript name conventions. Yes, I should read the stuff from a file instead of hard-wiring it...but this is enough to illustrate. The .F} is just a helper: .de F} .fp 1 \\$1 .fp 2 \\$2 .fp 3 \\$3 .fp 4 \\$4 .. Now, at this point you switch using \f1 through \f4, as the macro packages do internally. There's one more thing to help smooth this over--I define some strings like: .ds i \f2 .ds p \fP (the latter just for consistency) so that instead of \fIitalic\fP, which doesn't do what you want, or \f2italic\fP, which is obscure ("2" is not really a mnemonic for "italic" to most of the world), you would write \*iitalic\*p. The one thing you really *don't* want to do is make \fI or .ft I change to italic of the current font family--that's a change to troff semantics. -- Dick Dunn UUCP: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd (303)449-2870 ...Lately it occurs to me what a long, strange trip it's been.
brainerd@unmvax.unm.edu (Walt Brainerd) (06/25/89)
In article <15877@vail.ICO.ISC.COM>, rcd@ico.ISC.COM (Dick Dunn) writes: > > The one thing you really *don't* want to do is make \fI or .ft I change to > italic of the current font family--that's a change to troff semantics. > -- No, this is _not_ a change in troff semantics if it is in the context of a previously executed .font.family (or whatever) command that is not a "standard" troff command. This is one of the things that is desired so that one can take an existing source file and process it using more than one font family without changing all of the usual commands of the sort .ft I and \fI.