> The biggest culprit is info--a maddeningly archaic facility to which
> Gnu clings tenaciously. Unless it can be foreseen how new man
> macros would displace texinfo from its throne, the exercise will
> largely be in vain.
I think this is a bit unfair. Given that info was essentially the
first
On 3/25/14, Doug McIlroy wrote:
> As for real Knuthian line-breaking: when forced to use TeX, I
> typically resort to "/sloppy" mode to avoid the temper tantrums
> TeX throws when it can't do a good job.
I've never used TeX, so I'm not sure what you mean by this. Are the
temper tantrums peculiar
> My feeling is that the quality of the line-breaking algorithm is
> something that will be noticed by typography nerds, [...]
You will notice that immediately if you reduce the line length. The
shorter the lines, the more problematic is groff's paragraph layout.
If you want to set, say, three-c
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 03:34:27AM -0500, Dave Kemper wrote:
>
> My feeling is that the quality of the line-breaking algorithm is something
> that will be noticed by typography nerds, but the difficulty of installing
> new typefaces is something that will be noticed by any groff user who
> wants a
On 26-Mar-2014 21:15:34 Peter Schaffter wrote:
> I'm still puzzled by Werner's blanket dismissal of letterspacing.
> Attached is a pdf of side-by-side columns of identical justified
> text. In the RH column, 14 of the 27 lines of text have been
> adjusted with letterspacing, some loosened, some ti
> The grey is clearly superior to the unadjusted column.
It appears to me that "No adjustment" column appears worse than
it needs to because you're seriously inhibiting hyphenation...
> So there are two readily-available methods: varying
> letter-spacing, or varying inter-word spacing.
To follow up on the comparison, here's mine
(using only word-spacing, no letter-spacing).
Overall, I think I'm with Werner on the issue of letterspacing.
I usually find it visible (and irritat
Neither column of the side-by-side display looks very
good to me. The normal-spacing column is definitely
thin. The reduced-spaceing column is patchy--thick
in places and thin (by comparison) in others. I
prefer unjustified text to either. Besides having
more uniform density, it offers landmarks--t
On 27/03/14 13:41:32, Doug McIlroy wrote:
Neither column of the side-by-side display looks very good to me. The
normal-spacing column is definitely thin. The reduced-spaceing column
is patchy--thick in places and thin (by comparison) in others. I
prefer unjustified text to either. Besides ha
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 05:15:34PM -0400, Peter Schaffter wrote:
> Subject: [Groff] Letterspacing
>
> I'm still puzzled by Werner's blanket dismissal of letterspacing.
> Attached is a pdf of side-by-side columns of identical justified
> text. In the RH column, 14 of the 27 lines of text have been
> I'm still puzzled by Werner's blanket dismissal of letterspacing.
Well, as Tadziu's example shows, if you simply allow some squeezing of
the *inter-word* distances, you can get very nice results. If this
isn't good enough, some *minimum* letterspacing might be applied, as
done by pdftex.
Not
> This also raises the question of whether a paragraph-at-once
> algorithm could handle such single-line adjustments without being
> unwieldly or slow. I've never been able to get this kind of
> precision in TeX, as I've mentioned before; it's much faster to do
> it in groff.
My guess is that co
12 matches
Mail list logo
