On 2013-12-08 at 22:51:20 +0100, Jan Tosovsky wrote: > On 2013-12-08 Khaled Hosny wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 08, 2013 at 07:36:26PM +0100, Jan Tosovsky wrote: > > > On 2013-12-06 Khaled Hosny wrote: > > > > On Thu, Dec 05, 2013 at 11:01:44PM +0100, Jan Tosovsky wrote: > > > > > > > > > > typographic outputs comparable with Adobe InDesign, but with no > > > > > costs. While > > > > > > > > TeX predates InDesign by 30 years (not counting prototype > > > > versions of TeX), so it is the other way around. > > > > > > In this particular case I meant availability of microtypography > > > features like protrusion/expansion. > > > > Even that was introduced in PDFTeX which was released long before > > InDesign that were first released in 2002. > > When I compare InDesign and LuaTeX, I compare the CURRENT feature > set. It may seem unfair, but who cares the history... > > InDesign is currently de facto standard in professional typesetting > - it offers excellent typography, support for Unicode, Open Type > features, color management, produces PDFs compatible with various > standards - all this in a handy GUI.
Well, I recently had to repair broken PDF files created by InDesign. LuaTeX doesn't create invalid PDF. Regards, Reinhard -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reinhard Kotucha Phone: +49-511-3373112 Marschnerstr. 25 D-30167 Hannover mailto:[email protected] ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Microsoft isn't the answer. Microsoft is the question, and the answer is NO. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
