Re: [groff] [UTROFF] About fonts

[Pierre-Jean]

Larry Kollar <address@hidden> wrote:

> This is one of the things I like about Groff: the “.fam” request sets the 
> font family,
> and then the usual B / I / BI / R settings apply from there. For small caps, 
> I think
> a SC setting would be a sensible extension.

Indeed, that request seems very helpful.

> In my printed fiction, I use small caps for the headers (and in the front 
> matter).
> I’ve been using Neatroff for that, since I can turn on small caps with the 
> .ff request.
> It’s straightforward.

Fonts are better defined inline, in my opinion. I mean, there are a
lot of situations where we want to get rid of the space automatically
added by requests.


> >    f-000 roman
> >    f-100 bold
> >    f-010 italic
> >    f-001 small capitals
> >    f-002 acronyms, all capitals
> >    f-003 superscripts
> >    f-004 subscript
> >    f-005 final glyphs
> >    f-113 bold italic superscirpt
> >    f-302 Extra bold acronyms
> 
> TBH, I think this is overly complex… unless many TT/OT fonts provide special
> glyphs for super/subscript and acronyms. (I’m not sure what “final glyphs” 
> means
> in the above.) AT&T Troff attempted to render acronyms using what amounts to
> small-caps; I’m not sure what typographical difference there is between 
> acronyms
> and small-cap strings.

Inside the macro, it is complex, indeed. From the user point of view,
I believe the result is simpler than using hardcoded fonts (since
Heirloom Troff does not have that .fam request).

But, when we look at it, this system is nothing else than the .fam
request implemented within a macro: \*I adjusts a parameter within a
font family like \fI does in groff. It is only more complex in
appearance, because it deals with  features too. Yet, I will have a
second look at the implementation, to see if using a syntax close to
the .fam request could be better.

Utmac handles three fonts: Linux Libertine, Linux Biolinum, and
Apolline (a private font from Porchez Tyopfonderie). All of them
have both superscripts and subscripts (should I say «inferiors»?).
Final glyphs are decorative final characters (available in Apolline),
to be used at the end of a heading or a paragraph.

As we can see, the complexity comes from the highly detailed fonts we
can find these days. So, yes, my opinion is that groff should consider
offering shortcuts for not only B, I, BI, SC, but also for
superscripts and inferiors, and could even consider embolden and
italicized small caps, superscripts and inferiors...

Concerning acronyms, Jost Hochuli (in «the detail in typography»)
remarks that capitals are too high above the line to be pretty, while
small caps have a highlighting purpose we do not want for acronyms. So,
he advises to use normal capitals, but with a reduced size. That's
what the \*C does in utmac (using the .fzoom request of heirloom troff).

> OK, I’m intrigued. If you can get clean XML out of a *roff file, you have 
> something
> worth looking at!

If not today, I'll write about this tomorrow!

Thank you for your remarks,
Pierre-Jean.