Subject: mailing-list for TeXmacs Users
List archive
From : Sam Liddicott <address@hidden>- To: address@hidden
- Subject: Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt
- Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2012 16:30:40 +0000
On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 4:53 AM, Aleksandr Dobkin <address@hidden> wrote:
The problem here is that a bold variant of the typewriter font doesn't exist in the original Computer Modern family. The observed behavior is that bold typewriter and non-bold typewriter look the same. This is actually the default behavior in latex as well.
Yeah - the latex users rebelled and many methods of bold tt followed, included ams's poor-mans bold, txfonts or luximono.
Sam
- [TeXmacs] bold tt, Sam Liddicott, 03/20/2012
- Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt, François Poulain, 03/20/2012
- Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt, Sam Liddicott, 03/20/2012
- Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt, Kostas Oikonomou, 03/20/2012
- Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt, Sam Liddicott, 03/20/2012
- Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt, Aleksandr Dobkin, 03/21/2012
- Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt, Sam Liddicott, 03/22/2012
- Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt, Aleksandr Dobkin, 03/21/2012
- Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt, Sam Liddicott, 03/20/2012
- Re: [TeXmacs] bold tt, François Poulain, 03/20/2012
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.19.