h h extern said this at Sun, 3 Apr 2005 22:40:47 +0200:
>> 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
True, that. I was (or should have been ;) distinguishing foXet's (not
FO's) synonyms from a ConTeXt coding point of view, really.
>> 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]
And that (multiple) level of indirection, Bruce, is sort of what ties FO
to platform specifics, as I interpret it. You have to name the font
family just right, and fonts get different names on different platforms.
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Adam T. Lindsay, Computing Dept. atl@???
Lancaster University, InfoLab21 +44(0)1524/510.514
Lancaster, LA1 4WA, UK Fax:+44(0)1524/510.492
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
_______________________________________________
Foxet mailing list
Foxet@???
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/foxet
