[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: fontinst with 8y.etx
- To: Thierry.Bouche@ujf-grenoble.fr, email@example.com
- Subject: Re: fontinst with 8y.etx
- From: Ulrik Vieth <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:48:39 +0200
- In-reply-to: <199806101503.RAA22816@mozart.ujf-grenoble.fr> (message fromThierry Bouche on Wed, 10 Jun 1998 17:03:06 +0200 (MET DST))
>> Cc: "email@example.com.Subject":Re:firstname.lastname@example.org
Some problem with you mail software?
> Concernant « fontinst with 8y.etx », Ulrik Vieth écrit : «
> » [ I suppose Rowland won't be too happy to hear about this, but at
> » the risk of being flamed I'll push it out anyway. ]
> Melissa O'Neil has come up with a similar encoding that supposedly
> suppress the known problems with other encodings on the Mac.
> BTW, if LY1 is functionnally equivalent to 8r, why 8r ?
Good question. Personally, I find 8y (or LY1) slightly less arbitrary
then 8r. Both provide access to all the glyphs available in standard
PostScript fonts, they just use a slightly different arrangement.
Since hardly anybody seems to be interested in typesetting directly
with 8r, while OTOH Y&Y does promote typesetting with 8y (regardless
whether or not you may find that adequate for non-expertized fonts),
using fontinst to install 7t/8t/8c on top of 8y (and 8x, if available)
might turn out a compromise that could make eveyone happy? WDYT?