Return-Path: Received: from vvv.vsu.ru (account vvv [62.76.223.138] verified) by vsu.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 4.1.8) with ESMTP id 5599266; Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:37:24 +0300 To: =?iso-8859-15?q?Lars_Hellstr=F6m?= Cc: tex-fonts@math.utah.edu, texhax@tug.org, fontinst@tug.org, CyrTeX-ru@vsu.ru, CyrTeX-en@vsu.ru Subject: Re: [Fontinst] On the proper look of the \AA References: From: Vladimir Volovich Organization: Voronezh State University Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2004 23:37:23 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Lars =?iso-8859-15?q?Hellstr=F6m's?= message of "Fri, 16 Jan 2004 20:23:31 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.1004 (Gnus v5.10.4) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Lars, thank you for your comments. Let me ask your opinion on the practical question which was the source of my initial inquiry. The question is: if you were designing a new[1] LaTeX2e encoding definition file for some font encoding which contained all Latin letters and the ring accent, BUT NOT the Aring letter, would you put the special definition of \DeclareTextCompositeCommand for the combination "\r A" which is the same as the one present in ot1enc.def, or you would rather remove it, and let the "\r A" be constructed like other accented letters? E.g. the cyrillic T2* font encodings contain the Latin latters and the ring accent, and e.g. t2aenc.def contains the same \DeclareTextCompositeCommand as in ot1enc.def. Was is the right thing to do to put this composite command into the encoding definition files? This question should be considered having in mind that the default font family would be Computer Modern, but that it should NOT be concentrated only on the CM family, but try to "do the best thing" for other font families which might be used with this font encoding.[2] Would your answer differ if there was no compatibility issue with CM font family? i.e. if there were no CM-like fonts for that font encoding, and only "arbiotrary" font families would be used? Thank you. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D start footnotes =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D [1] new, so it would be possible to completely ignore the backward-compatibility issues (including ones with Plain TeX), i.e. considering purely the "right thing to do". Obviously, changing an existing file for a along established and stable font encoding like OT1 is not an option. [2] that means that the gap between A and ring in \r{A} will be smaller than the gap between other accents and other letters. would THAT be acceptable? =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D end footnotes =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D "LH" =3D=3D Lars Hellstr=F6m writes: [...] >> 2) shall the artificial accent placement be applied to other >> combinations of capital letters and accents on the level of >> encoding definition files? LH> ? Please clarify. you said: LH> This might actually be the reason to _make_ it touch the LH> A. Recall that accents over capitals are usually quite close to LH> the letter (closer than in the case of lower case letters). i meant that the \accent command places accents using the same "gap" for uppercase and lowercase letters (is this so?); so i was asking, are you proposing that commands like \" \' \` shall be redefined to behave differently if they are applied to capital letters, i.e.use some trick similar to the one used in the definition of \AA in plain TeX or \r{A} composite command, to make the gap smaller. Best, v.