Difference between revisions of "Talk:TypeScripts - Old Content"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (response) |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
* Encodings: I think we should show both (I think \defaultencoding is better readable/understandable) | * Encodings: I think we should show both (I think \defaultencoding is better readable/understandable) | ||
--[[User:Hraban|Hraban]] 00:15, 14 Apr 2005 (CEST) | --[[User:Hraban|Hraban]] 00:15, 14 Apr 2005 (CEST) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Okay, sounds good to me. --[[User:Adam|Adam]] | ||
Revision as of 17:01, 14 April 2005
Excuse me, "SerifBook"? Do you get that to work? Also, I'm inclined not to use \defaultencoding but rather [ec,8r,texnansi,t2a,t2b,t5] (etc.) and \typescriptthree to illustrate the flexibility. Should I replace or show it as another step? --Adam
- "Book": sorry, was a mistake (my fontscript writing script takes the PostScript font variant name).
- Encodings: I think we should show both (I think \defaultencoding is better readable/understandable)
--Hraban 00:15, 14 Apr 2005 (CEST)
Okay, sounds good to me. --Adam
