bold \tt and pdf-output

bold \tt and pdf-output

[Peter Münster]

Hello,

with bold typewriter font I have more success, but one problem remains:
pdf-output. There is the same problem as with bold small caps:

kpathsea: Running mktexpk --mfmode / --bdpi 72 --mag 1+14/72 --dpi 86 cmbtt10
mktexpk: Mismatched mode ljfzzz and resolution 72; ignoring mode.
mktexpk: Can't guess mode for 72 dpi devices.
mktexpk: Use a config file, or update me.
kpathsea: Appending font creation commands to missfont.log.

This is my test-file:

\definebodyfont [12pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt10 at 12pt]
\definebodyfont [11pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt10 at 11pt]
\definebodyfont [10pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt10]
\definebodyfont [9pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt9]
\definebodyfont [8pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt8]
\starttext
{\tt Normal and \bf bold Typewriter.}
\stoptext

Could there be support for bold typewriter in the distribution?

Cheers, Peter

-- 
http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/

Re: bold \tt and pdf-output

[Hans Hagen]

� wrote:

>Hello,
>
>with bold typewriter font I have more success, but one problem remains:
>pdf-output. There is the same problem as with bold small caps:
>
>kpathsea: Running mktexpk --mfmode / --bdpi 72 --mag 1+14/72 --dpi 86 cmbtt10
>mktexpk: Mismatched mode ljfzzz and resolution 72; ignoring mode.
>mktexpk: Can't guess mode for 72 dpi devices.
>mktexpk: Use a config file, or update me.
>kpathsea: Appending font creation commands to missfont.log.
>
>This is my test-file:
>
>\definebodyfont [12pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt10 at 12pt]
>\definebodyfont [11pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt10 at 11pt]
>\definebodyfont [10pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt10]
>\definebodyfont [9pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt9]
>\definebodyfont [8pt] [tt] [bf=cmbtt8]
>\starttext
>{\tt Normal and \bf bold Typewriter.}
>\stoptext
>
>Could there be support for bold typewriter in the distribution?
>  
>
looks like some metafont problem; however, forget about those fonts, 
take a look at latin modern instead: it has narrow tt, light tt and 
heavy tt (which is what you're looking for)

Hans

Re: bold \tt and pdf-output

[Taco Hoekwater]

Peter Münster wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> with bold typewriter font I have more success, but one problem remains:
> pdf-output. There is the same problem as with bold small caps:
> 
> kpathsea: Running mktexpk --mfmode / --bdpi 72 --mag 1+14/72 --dpi 86 cmbtt10
> mktexpk: Mismatched mode ljfzzz and resolution 72; ignoring mode.
> mktexpk: Can't guess mode for 72 dpi devices.
> mktexpk: Use a config file, or update me.
> kpathsea: Appending font creation commands to missfont.log.

cmbtt is a metafont-only font. As Hans said: have a look at latin
modern. If you really want cmbtt, you can use the pdftex primitive

    \pdfpkresolution = 600

(for example) to specify a resolution.

Cheers, Taco

Re: bold \tt and pdf-output

[Peter Münster]

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

> cmbtt is a metafont-only font. As Hans said: have a look at latin
> modern. If you really want cmbtt, you can use the pdftex primitive
> 
>     \pdfpkresolution = 600
> 
> (for example) to specify a resolution.

Hello Taco,
thank you, \pdfpkresolution works well!

Indeed, there is a dark lm-type-writer font, and with LaTeX, you get it
automatically.
Test-file:
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{lmodern}
\begin{document}
\texttt{Normal and \textbf{bold Type-Writer}}
\end{document}

But they are not so bold as the cmbtt ones. Anyway: how could the dark lmtt
font be activated in ConTeXt and could this be included in the
distribution?

And what about bold sc-font?

Greetings, Peter

-- 
http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/

Re: bold \tt and pdf-output

[Hans Hagen]

� wrote:

>On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>
>  
>
>>cmbtt is a metafont-only font. As Hans said: have a look at latin
>>modern. If you really want cmbtt, you can use the pdftex primitive
>>
>>    \pdfpkresolution = 600
>>
>>(for example) to specify a resolution.
>>    
>>
>
>Hello Taco,
>thank you, \pdfpkresolution works well!
>
>Indeed, there is a dark lm-type-writer font, and with LaTeX, you get it
>automatically.
>Test-file:
>\documentclass{article}
>\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
>\usepackage{lmodern}
>\begin{document}
>\texttt{Normal and \textbf{bold Type-Writer}}
>\end{document}
>  
>
not automatically, you have to ask for it: \usepackage{lmodern}

and i guess that lmodern is not compatible with normal cmodern -)

>But they are not so bold as the cmbtt ones. Anyway: how could the dark lmtt
>font be activated in ConTeXt and could this be included in the
>distribution?
>  
>
by default, context loads the cmr fonts with design sizes, nowadays 
replaced by their latin modern alternative

in order to be backward compatible (although one can dispute the 
neccessity of this) the dark etc variants are not used

if you want them:

\starttypescript [mono] [computer-modern] [size]

  \definebodyfont 
[4pt,5pt,6pt,7pt,8pt,9pt,10pt,11pt,12pt,14.4pt,17.3pt,20.7pt] [tt]
    [bf=LMTypewriter-Dark sa 1,
     bs=LMTypewriter-DarkOblique sa 1]

\stoptypescript

\usetypescript[modern][texnansi] \setupbodyfont[modern]

\starttext

{\tt test \bf test \definedfont[MonoBold] test}

\stoptext

wil give it; however, easier is:

\usetypescript[modern-base][texnansi] \setupbodyfont[modern]

\starttext

{\tt test \bf test \definedfont[MonoBold] test}

\stoptext

this alternative used 10 pt as base and since we have hinting in latin 
modern, the results are ok

 \definetypeface [modern] [rm] [serif] [modern] [computer-modern] 
[encoding=\typescripttwo]
  \definetypeface [modern] [ss] [sans]  [modern] [computer-modern] 
[encoding=\typescripttwo]
  \definetypeface [modern] [tt] [mono]  [modern-cond] [computer-modern] 
[encoding=\typescripttwo]
  \definetypeface [modern] [mm] [math]  [modern] [computer-modern] 
[encoding=\typescripttwo]

will give give you condensed (modern-light will give you light)

Hans

Hans

Re: bold \tt and pdf-output

[Peter Münster]

On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Hans Hagen wrote:

> >automatically.
> >Test-file:
> >\documentclass{article}
> >\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
> >\usepackage{lmodern}
> >\begin{document}
> >\texttt{Normal and \textbf{bold Type-Writer}}
> >\end{document}
> >  
> >
> not automatically, you have to ask for it: \usepackage{lmodern}

Hi Hans,

ok, you're right. What I meant: after loading lm, no further work is needed
to get bold tt.

> >But they are not so bold as the cmbtt ones. Anyway: how could the dark lmtt
> >font be activated in ConTeXt and could this be included in the
> >distribution?
> >  
> >
> by default, context loads the cmr fonts with design sizes, nowadays 
> replaced by their latin modern alternative
> 
> in order to be backward compatible (although one can dispute the 
> neccessity of this) the dark etc variants are not used

In fact, you are never backward compatible. Just an example:
\setupindenting[medium] is now \setupindenting[medium]
And there are a lot more.
If someone does not want bold tt in lm, then there could be a switch like
"\nobftt".

Nevertheless: thanks for your suggestions, they work very well!

Cheers, Peter

P.S.: Any comments about bold small caps?

-- 
http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/

Re: bold \tt and pdf-output

[Taco Hoekwater]

Peter Münster wrote:

> And there are a lot more.
> If someone does not want bold tt in lm, then there could be a switch like
> "\nobftt".
> 
> Nevertheless: thanks for your suggestions, they work very well!
> 
> Cheers, Peter
> 
> P.S.: Any comments about bold small caps?

Latin Modern doesn't have a bold small caps (yet?), I think.

Taco

Re: bold \tt and pdf-output

[Vit Zyka]

Taco Hoekwater wrote:
> Peter Münster wrote:
> 
>> And there are a lot more.
>> If someone does not want bold tt in lm, then there could be a switch like
>> "\nobftt".
>>
>> Nevertheless: thanks for your suggestions, they work very well!
>>
>> Cheers, Peter
>>
>> P.S.: Any comments about bold small caps?
> 
> 
> Latin Modern doesn't have a bold small caps (yet?), I think.

If you really need it, generate pseudo small caps
http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Pseudo_Small_Caps

Vit

problems with bold small caps (was: Re: bold \tt and pdf-output)

[Peter Münster]

On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Taco Hoekwater wrote:

> Peter Münster wrote:
> 
> > P.S.: Any comments about bold small caps?
> 
> Latin Modern doesn't have a bold small caps (yet?), I think.

Yes. I've just made a reference to my message from 5th December with the
subject "problems with bold small caps". Here it is (2/4 problems already
solved):

I would like to get bold small caps, here is my test-file:

\enableregime[il1]

\definebodyfont [12pt] [sc] [bf=ecxc1200]
\definebodyfont [11pt] [sc] [bf=ecxc1100]
\definebodyfont [10pt] [sc] [bf=ecxc1000]
\definebodyfont [9pt] [sc] [bf=ecxc0900]
\definebodyfont [8pt] [sc] [bf=ecxc0800]

\starttext
{\sc Normal and \bf bold Small-Caps. Accents: àÉßöÜ}
\stoptext


And here are my problems:

1.) I get bold sc font, but the normal \sc is now the normal font.

2.) Accented characters are not correct.


Cheers, Peter

-- 
http://pmrb.free.fr/contact/

Re: problems with bold small caps

[Taco Hoekwater]

Peter Münster wrote:
> On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
> 
> \starttext
> {\sc Normal and \bf bold Small-Caps. Accents: àÉßöÜ}
> \stoptext

Hi Peter,

> And here are my problems:
> 
> 1.) I get bold sc font, but the normal \sc is now the normal font.

\sc and \bf are defined at the same level in ConTeXt, so they (normally)
exclude each other. My guess is that it is very unlikely that this will
be fixed, but I assume it would be possible to do something using the
\variants mechanism (note: I am not sure and would not know how)

> 2.) Accented characters are not correct.

My guess is that maybe the regime also switches the font encoding?
The ecXXXX fonts definately only exist in EC encoding.

Cheers, Taco

Re: problems with bold small caps

[Taco Hoekwater]

I wrote:
> \sc and \bf are defined at the same level in ConTeXt, so they (normally)
> exclude each other. My guess is that it is very unlikely that this will
> be fixed, but ...

make that

 > be changed, but ..

Because it is not a bug, the behaviour is intentional.

Taco

Re: problems with bold small caps

[Adam Lindsay]

Taco Hoekwater wrote:

> I wrote:
> 
>> \sc and \bf are defined at the same level in ConTeXt, so they (normally)
>> exclude each other. My guess is that it is very unlikely that this will
>> be fixed, but ...
> 
> 
> make that
> 
>  > be changed, but ..
> 
> Because it is not a bug, the behaviour is intentional.

Yes, and it's what variants were intended to address, to "stack" font 
switching behaviour on top of known shapes and weights. Old Style 
sometimes exists in more than regular shapes. Small Caps appear in bold 
and sometimes even italics versions. (Variants were also to get at fonts 
that wouldn't normally have a style associated with them, as well.)

adam
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  Adam T. Lindsay, Computing Dept.     atl@comp.lancs.ac.uk
  Lancaster University, InfoLab21        +44(0)1524/510.514
  Lancaster, LA1 4WA, UK             Fax:+44(0)1524/510.492
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: problems with bold small caps

[Hans Hagen]

Taco Hoekwater wrote:

>
>
> Peter M�nster wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>>
>> \starttext
>> {\sc Normal and \bf bold Small-Caps. Accents: �����}
>> \stoptext
>
>
> Hi Peter,
>
>> And here are my problems:
>>
>> 1.) I get bold sc font, but the normal \sc is now the normal font.
>
>
> \sc and \bf are defined at the same level in ConTeXt, so they (normally)
> exclude each other. My guess is that it is very unlikely that this will
> be fixed, but I assume it would be possible to do something using the
> \variants mechanism (note: I am not sure and would not know how)

thi sis an option indeed; the other method is just to define an 
additional typeface

\definetypeface[mainface].....
\definetypeface[smallface].....
\definetypeface[osface].....

andthen do things like \smallface\bf

typeface switching is rather efficient

Hans

Re: problems with bold small caps

[Vit Zyka]

Hans Hagen wrote:
> Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>>
>> Peter M�nster wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, 12 Dec 2005, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
>>>
>>> \starttext
>>> {\sc Normal and \bf bold Small-Caps. Accents: �����}
>>> \stoptext
>>
>> Hi Peter,
>>
>>> And here are my problems:
>>>
>>> 1.) I get bold sc font, but the normal \sc is now the normal font.
>>
>>
>>
>> \sc and \bf are defined at the same level in ConTeXt, so they (normally)
>> exclude each other. My guess is that it is very unlikely that this will
>> be fixed, but I assume it would be possible to do something using the
>> \variants mechanism (note: I am not sure and would not know how)
> 
> 
> thi sis an option indeed;

This is implemented at http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Pseudo_Small_Caps
(links to files on typokvitek.com has to be retyped, sorry)

Vit

> the other method is just to define an 
> additional typeface
> 
> \definetypeface[mainface].....
> \definetypeface[smallface].....
> \definetypeface[osface].....
> 
> andthen do things like \smallface\bf
> 
> typeface switching is rather efficient
> 
> Hans
> _______________________________________________
> ntg-context mailing list
> ntg-context@ntg.nl
> http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
> 

-- 
=======================================================
Ing. Vít Zýka, Ph.D.                         TYPOkvítek

database publishing              databazove publikovani
data maintaining and typesetting in typographic quality
priprava dat a jejich sazba v typograficke kvalite

tel.: (+420) 777 198 189     www: http://typokvitek.com
=======================================================

Re: bold \tt and pdf-output

[Hans Hagen]

� wrote:

>On Tue, 6 Dec 2005, Hans Hagen wrote:
>
>  
>
>>>automatically.
>>>Test-file:
>>>\documentclass{article}
>>>\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
>>>\usepackage{lmodern}
>>>\begin{document}
>>>\texttt{Normal and \textbf{bold Type-Writer}}
>>>\end{document}
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>not automatically, you have to ask for it: \usepackage{lmodern}
>>    
>>
>
>Hi Hans,
>
>ok, you're right. What I meant: after loading lm, no further work is needed
>to get bold tt.
>
>  
>
sure, but it would break compatibility (unless everyone agrees upon  
having bold tt  enabled by default);  latex has different compatibility 
rules  (and does not default to latin modern)

>>>But they are not so bold as the cmbtt ones. Anyway: how could the dark lmtt
>>>font be activated in ConTeXt and could this be included in the
>>>distribution?
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>by default, context loads the cmr fonts with design sizes, nowadays 
>>replaced by their latin modern alternative
>>
>>in order to be backward compatible (although one can dispute the 
>>neccessity of this) the dark etc variants are not used
>>    
>>
>
>In fact, you are never backward compatible. Just an example:
>\setupindenting[medium] is now \setupindenting[medium]
>And there are a lot more.
>  
>
hm, not that many i hope; concerning the indenting, that was basically a 
merge of two commands [and the auto yes was a bug]

>If someone does not want bold tt in lm, then there could be a switch like
>"\nobftt".
>
>Nevertheless: thanks for your suggestions, they work very well!
>  
>
Hans