From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/45324 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Hans Hagen Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: MkII vs. MkIV Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:29:21 +0100 Message-ID: <4911ADC1.4000003@wxs.nl> References: <20081104200615.GA2264@atos.labs.wmid.amu.edu.pl> <420A16D6-319B-49F6-8B52-F7E7FDF5618B@gmail.com> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1225895486 26230 80.91.229.12 (5 Nov 2008 14:31:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 14:31:26 +0000 (UTC) To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Wed Nov 05 15:32:28 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.88] helo=ronja.ntg.nl) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KxjQp-0001FH-Qp for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:32:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE8421FC27; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 15:31:18 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 04420-01-5; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 15:30:04 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDD931FBD5; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 15:30:02 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id A96C01FB95 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 15:29:59 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 02659-01-10 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 15:29:20 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from mail.pragma-ade.net (dsl-083-247-100-017.solcon.nl [83.247.100.17]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63A361FC07 for ; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 15:29:20 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from [10.100.1.112] (unverified [10.100.1.11]) by controller-1 (SurgeMail 3.9e) with ESMTP id 7061-1840426 for ; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 15:29:19 +0100 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) In-Reply-To: X-Originating-IP: 10.100.1.11 X-Authenticated-User: hagen@controller-1 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:45324 Archived-At: Aditya Mahajan wrote: > On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Wolfgang Schuster wrote: > >> Am 04.11.2008 um 21:20 schrieb Aditya Mahajan: >> >>> On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Marcin Borkowski wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Is it normal that output from MkII and MkIV are different in terms of >>>> page breaks? >>> Yes. In MKII the interline space is hard coded. MKIV gets the >>> interline >>> space from the font. So, you will get different page breaks. I >>> experienced >>> around 2-5 pages difference in a 100 page document. >> The interlinespace in MkII and MkIV is the same and both use a distance >> of 2.8ex between the lines. > > Yes, but ex means different dimensions in pdftex and luatex. For example > > \starttext > > 1ex = \the\dimexpr1ex\relax \crlf > 2.8ex = \the\dimexpr2.8ex\relax > > \stoptext > > gives in MKII > > 1ex = 5.16667pt > 2.8ex = 14.46669pt > > and in MKIV gives > > 1ex = 5.172pt > 2.8ex = 14.4816pt > > The reason is that what ex means is hardcoded in MKII but MKIV gets this > info from the font. For example, if I use palatino at 12pt, the result in > MKII does not change, but MKIV gives > > 1ex = 5.388pt > 2.8ex = 15.08641pt > > So, depending on the font, MKII and MKIV can have considerably different > lines per page. - for type 1, mkiv gets the info from the afm file and has some heuristics if it's not in there; in mkii it's set in the tfm and such values can depends on decisions made while making the tfm file - for otf again the info is taken from the font file in both cases, there is no longer the limitations imposed by the tfm format (like discrete number of ht/dp) and as such there can be differences between mkii and mkiv Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl ----------------------------------------------------------------- ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________