\godown

\godown

[Adam Lindsay]

Hi all,

I've been TeX-doodling with the font shown on the page below:
http://www.typography.com/catalog/hoeflertext/ornaments.html

Some of the nicer patterns are predicated on having horizontal as well 
as vertical elements smashed up next to one another. I find myself 
having to adjust for little gaps with:
  \godown[-0.029\bodyfontsize]

Does this ring a bell with anyone? I would have thought \godown[0pt] was 
the answer, but not so, here. The font metrics seem to be right, adding 
up to 1000 in both directions (or a little more, actually, considering 
overlapping dots).
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  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: \godown

[Taco Hoekwater]

Adam Lindsay wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I've been TeX-doodling with the font shown on the page below:
> http://www.typography.com/catalog/hoeflertext/ornaments.html
> 
> Some of the nicer patterns are predicated on having horizontal as well 
> as vertical elements smashed up next to one another. I find myself 
> having to adjust for little gaps with:
>  \godown[-0.029\bodyfontsize]
> 
> Does this ring a bell with anyone? 

The last time I had problems with minute offsets, it was Acrobat's
fault. Do you also have problems in DVI mode?

Taco

Re: \godown

[Hans Hagen]

Adam Lindsay wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I've been TeX-doodling with the font shown on the page below:
> http://www.typography.com/catalog/hoeflertext/ornaments.html
>
> Some of the nicer patterns are predicated on having horizontal as well 
> as vertical elements smashed up next to one another. I find myself 
> having to adjust for little gaps with:
>  \godown[-0.029\bodyfontsize]
>
> Does this ring a bell with anyone? I would have thought \godown[0pt] 
> was the answer, but not so, here. The font metrics seem to be right, 
> adding up to 1000 in both directions (or a little more, actually, 
> considering overlapping dots).

this is tex's interlinespace mechanism popping in; play a bit with

a row of things \par
\nointerlinespace
a row of things \par

or

\vbox \bgroup \offinterlinespace
  rows of ornaments
\egroup

Hans

Re: \godown

[Adam Lindsay]

Hans Hagen wrote:
> Adam Lindsay wrote:
> 
>> having to adjust for little gaps with:
>>  \godown[-0.029\bodyfontsize]
>>
>> Does this ring a bell with anyone? I would have thought \godown[0pt] 
>> was the answer, but not so, here. The font metrics seem to be right, 
>> adding up to 1000 in both directions (or a little more, actually, 
>> considering overlapping dots).
> 
> this is tex's interlinespace mechanism popping in; play a bit with
> 
> a row of things \par
> \nointerlinespace
> a row of things \par
> 
> or
> 
> \vbox \bgroup \offinterlinespace
>  rows of ornaments
> \egroup

In case anyone else is trying to follow along, those are most likely the 
\nointerlineskip / \offinterlineskip commands. I played with them the 
same night, and the results are indistinguishable from \godown[0pt].

Hmm.
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  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: \godown

[Adam Lindsay]

Taco Hoekwater wrote:
> 
> 
> Adam Lindsay wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've been TeX-doodling with the font shown on the page below:
>> http://www.typography.com/catalog/hoeflertext/ornaments.html
>>
>> Some of the nicer patterns are predicated on having horizontal as well 
>> as vertical elements smashed up next to one another. I find myself 
>> having to adjust for little gaps with:
>>  \godown[-0.029\bodyfontsize]
>>
>> Does this ring a bell with anyone? 
> 
> 
> The last time I had problems with minute offsets, it was Acrobat's
> fault. Do you also have problems in DVI mode?

Hmm. I do need to examine it in different viewers... Nope. Adobe Acrobat 
gives the same results as Apple's PDF implementation.

I'm a bit stuck with DVI: dvipdfmx has trouble seeing the converted Mac 
font as a TTF font. (Once I worked through the difference in map file 
format...) Clearly there's a disagreement on which tables are required.

Thanks, though. The negative offset is not a big problem. The only weird 
thing is the feature interaction I also posted about.
-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
  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
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-