dvjm@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (David Murphy) (11/20/90)
A gripe about AMSLaTeX 1.0;
In the old days of TeX 2.95, one could use the
AMS symbols in LaTeX by merely including AMSsymbols.sty.
Now we have AMSLaTeX, and several problems;
(1) There seems to be no way to use the ams fonts
easily without including amstex.sty. One certainly cannot
just include the new amssymbols.sty in a latex document.
(2) AMSLaTeX, which we are forced to use if we
want the symbols, has a really stupid notion of math
character selection build in, at least from the CS point
of view. In CS we have long variable names, not single
characters, so I don't want to type \bf{t}\bf{r}\bf{u}\bf{e}
instead of {\bf true}. Moreover, math italic is, as we
have already pointed out here, unsuitable for use with
long variable names. It would be nice to make mathitalic
*by default* textitalic. I don't want to have to say
\textitalic{blah} everytime.
Any help much appreciated.
David Murphy, | JANET: dvjm@uk.ac.glasgow.cs
Dept. of Computing Science, | UUCP: ..!mcsun!ukc!uk.ac.glasgow.cs!dvjm
University of Glasgow, | ARPA: dvjm%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Glasgow G12 8QQ, SCOTLAND | Little men with bits of lead are better
--
David Murphy, | JANET: dvjm@uk.ac.glasgow.cs
Dept. of Computing Science, | UUCP: ..!mcsun!ukc!uk.ac.glasgow.cs!dvjm
University of Glasgow, | ARPA: dvjm%cs.glasgow.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
Glasgow G12 8QQ, SCOTLAND + Necessity is the mother of strange bedfellowsajcd@cs.edinburgh.ac.uk (Angus Duggan) (11/21/90)
In article <7014@vanuata.cs.glasgow.ac.uk>, dvjm@cs.glasgow.ac.uk (David Murphy) writes: > A gripe about AMSLaTeX 1.0; ... I've sent David an answer to this; to summarise: 1) I've got a version of the new amssymb.sty which can be used from LaTeX. 2) This depends on how the new font selection scheme is configured. The style file "nomargid.sty" disables the new syntax. Different maths versions are easy to do, too. Now my question: I've just built and installed the AMSFonts 2.0, and have noticed problems with some of the characters: Some of the Cyrillic characters (Zh, k) break up with our mode_def; the curves on others (dj, L/l, Lj/lj) do not seem to be very smooth. All of the maths extension symbols which have squares seem to have a couple of pixels missing at the lower left corner (giving a "rounded" look to the corner), as if they were drawn with a wide pen on a non-closed path. There are other minor points, such as assymmetries, which make it look as if the rasterization of these fonts has not been tuned. Are these fonts "beta-release" status, or are they finished? Are these known problems? A. -- Angus Duggan, Department of Computer Science, | I'm pink, therefore I'm Spam. University of Edinburgh, JCMB, | JANET: ajcd@uk.ac.ed.lfcs The King's Buildings, Mayfield Road, | VOICE: (UK) 031 650 5126 Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, Scotland. | OR: ajcd%lfcs.ed.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk