Re: \em: real italics?

[Hans Hagen <pragma@wxs.nl>]

Frans Goddijn wrote:
> 
> In ConTeXt, if I do {\em text} then the word "text" is set in slanted
> font. In this case, my normal roman upright Times font is faked into
> leaning over a bit. I'd rather have this default to real italics, since I
> have an italics Times font. The idea to have fakes in my text body makes
> me uneasy. What is a real typographer would se me hacking here?

>From the source code font-ini.tex: 

%D \def\emphasistypeface {\it}
%D \def\emphasisboldface {\bi}

You can change these.

> Of course, the trade off here would be that anything set in true small
> caps in the {\em ... } environment would me missing, since I don't have a
> "small caps italic" font. But I think the chances of that happening would
> be small if I watch out a little. Or maybe I could have a macro preventing
> this, a variation of "\kap" that will set in small caps even though the
> environment is italics?

Hm. Remind me to look into this one day ... Maybe an entry in the font
environment definition. 

> How and where could I flip a switch telling ConTeXt to use real italics
> for emphasized text?
> 
> Why is it slanted in default? Is that a technical necessity for possible
> missing fonts or do the programmers think it 's actually prettier? I could
> be wrong surmising that real italics is better, say, in an interview where
> questions are in italics, answers in roman font.

Well, I consider the computer modern italic to be rather ugly
(unreadable). 

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
    tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | mail: pragma@wxs.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------