ken@cs.rochester.edu (Ken Yap) (06/05/90)
In article <GLENN.90Apr25124929@huxley.bitstream.com>: |> From: pcg@cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) |> Most current font design, some grand new ideas excepted, is really |> tinkering with treid and true shapes. You get incremental improvements, |> granted, but nothing about which people get really excited (Computer |> Modern? :->). And, to get back to the font ownership problem, this still |> means that most font designers (like most software authors) really stand |> on the platform of centuries of free fonts. | |Nevertheless, there are two important factors to be considered. One you |have alluded to is the possibility of "grand new ideas." The other is the |value inherent in a faithful, digital reproduction of an well-designed |typeface. Anybody that overlooks this value might as well use Computer |Modern (and many do :-). Lest people think Computer Modern was intended to be a radical new design, Modern in font parlance means in the last 200 years. CM is based on Monotype 8. So yes, it stands on the platform of an older font. The design is not new, the tool is.