summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_3/dpc.tex
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_3/dpc.tex')
-rw-r--r--usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_3/dpc.tex33
1 files changed, 33 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_3/dpc.tex b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_3/dpc.tex
new file mode 100644
index 0000000000..6538f8fb0e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/usergrps/uktug/baskervi/5_3/dpc.tex
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
+Given the time scale I would probably let it lie, but I'm still not
+convinced by the aufflamen example on page 17.
+
+The new PS file says
+
+(T)q(he)h(printing)f(r)o(esult)i(is)e(\252auff)q
+(lammen)n(\272)1995 4334 y(instead)21 b(of)g(\252auf)q(\257ammen)n
+
+Which looks like the first example is printing
+ f f l
+and the second example is
+ f <fl>
+
+The second example would be consistent with BV not using the expert
+set, but I wonder how using "| to put a visual break between the two
+f's managed to break the following fl ligature in the first example?
+
+I would have thought that actually you would want
+auf"|flamen
+to produce
+
+ f <fl> (as opposed to <ffl>) (or <ff> l if no <ffl> ligature)
+
+and that you would need something like
+auf"|f"|lamen
+
+to break both ligatures.
+
+So I would leave it this time, but perhaps could check what the VPL
+file is doing with f ligs one day?
+
+David
+