On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 12:41, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:
> Am 13.05.2009 um 12:17 schrieb Mojca Miklavec:
>> Or do you want to suggest that one would possibly need both "serif"
>> and "sans" variants of some Chinese font, often switching between
>> families inside a document?
> That's what I mean, also in chinese you use different fonts for
> serif, sans and mono.

Wait a minute ... why do they need mono/typewriter? Aren't all the
Chinese glyphs "fixed width" anyway?

Also, if one has a well-designed font that includes all the latin
glyphs and all the bold/italic variants then one should in principle
not need an extra "latin" family, but those are probably just nice
dreams ... I always had the impression that there are not many
high-quality Chinese fonts and that having bold and italic alone is a
problem, not to speak about frequent mixing of several different

(Just thinking alound: aren't there plenty of books around that also
mix lots of greek and latin, possibly using different fonts for them?
How do they deal with the problem, or is the problem just

If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : https://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net

Reply via email to