Adam Lindsay wrote:
> Bruce D'Arcus said this at Sun, 3 Apr 2005 14:16:07 -0400:
>
>
>>Adam Lindsay wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Okay, you name 'Gill Sans' as the font family here, but to a computer,
>>>'Gill Sans' is not the same as 'GillSans' down below, right?
>>
>>Part of the problem is that I've never really understood the logic of
>>HOW ConTeXt thinks about fonts. It's incredibly frustrating; right up
>>there with trying to understand xml namespaces in a deep way!
>
>
> Even more frustrating is how foXet adds a slightly different, somewhat
> more modern and flexible way of thinking about fonts.
hm, but it lacks a consistent body font model
> For me, the metaphor of pachinko keeps coming up when thinking about
> fonts in ConTeXt: each font synonym sets up another pin to bounce off
it's indeed a chain of mappings, but the advantage is that (in context) one can
use symbolic names all over the place, like
\definefont[TitleFont][SerifBold at 50pt]
without bothering what SerifBold actually is (Palatino-Bold, PalatinoBold,
PaladioSemi-Bold, etc)
[btw, in my opinion fo by design is platform dependent with regards to fonts]
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Foxet mailing list
Foxet@???
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/foxet
