On Tue, 16 Apr 2002, Hans Hagen wrote:
> Vulgar (i like that more than Nice) Fraction again:
I believe it's a more correct name, also. :)
[...]
> \or % method 1
> \high{\tx#1\kern-\hspaceamount\vulgarfraction}%
> \symbol[\vulgarfraction]%
> \low{\kern-\hspaceamount\vulgarfraction\tx#2}%
This reports the error:
systems : begin file test at line 32
! Undefined control sequence.
<argument> \tx 1\kern -\hspaceamount
\vulgarfraction
\dohighlow ...\scratchdimen \hbox {\dodohighlow #5
}}\ht \scratchbox \struthe...
\vulgarfraction ...\hspaceamount \vulgarfraction }
\symbol [\vulgarfraction ]...
\tabulatecontent ...method 1\vulgarfraction {1}{2}
\NC \NR \NC 2 \NC \charde...
\fulltabulatecontent ...ble }\fi \tabulatecontent
\ifx \tabulatetailcontent ...
\processtabulate ...oksa \cr \fulltabulatecontent
\crcr }}\ifnum \nofautotab...
l.43 \stoptabulate
?
[...]
> so, it's kind of configurable
It looks good, although I can't imagine (personally) why option 2 would
ever be used. It has the bad points of both 0 and 3 at the same time. ;)
Something you may want to do with your testing is run through the whole
range of fractions: 1/3 1/4 3/4 1/8 5/8 7/8
Those, out of the whole set of halves, thirds, quarters and eighths seem
to be the ones that react most oddly to the kerning and typesetting
technique.
Daniel
--
Men love to wonder, and that is the seed of our science.
-- Ralph Waldo Emerson, _Society and Solitude_
