Re: sqrt troubles with eqn

[andlabs]

Here's what I did for my document:

\(sr\z\(address@hidden@

(where
.EQ
delim @@
.EN )

Perhaps eqn could do that as well?

And I'm not saying that the glyph is ruined on large fonts: I'm saying that
each character overlaps, like in the other guy's original PostScript output.
I must've gotten confused by what he said.


Werner LEMBERG wrote:
> 
>> For -Tdvi, I was not able to find a standalone DVI to PostScript
>> converter, and the only to DVI to PDF converters required a
>> non-standalone library called kpathsea.
> 
> Well, kpathsea can be compiled stand-alone.  However, this isn't
> trivial since basically noone needs that.
> 
>> I just want to have square root working correctly: it seems as if
>> eqn is giving zero width to the radical sign (perhaps with \z\(sr or
>> something else) and the upper bar (\z\(rn).
> 
> I just can repeat: Both AT&T's and groff's eqn use the standard
> PostScript glyph for the square root sign.  It's not possible to get a
> better appearance by scaling.
> 
> A possible solution to this situation would be to extend groff eqn so
> that it uses a larger set of mathematical glyphs which, among others,
> contain better shapes for large radical signs and parentheses.  The
> `cmex10' font used in DVI mode exists in a PS version also (attached);
> it might be a worthwile exercise to add this font to groff (using the
> same groff glyph names as provided for `devdvi').
> 
> Any takers to experiment with?  As soon as groff finds those glyphs it
> uses them...
> 
> 
>     Werner
> 
>  
> _______________________________________________
> bug-groff mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-groff
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: 
http://www.nabble.com/sqrt-troubles-with-eqn-tf4497348.html#a12826528
Sent from the Groff - Bugs mailing list archive at Nabble.com.