Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-05 Thread Olivier Ripoll

Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:

tedc wrote:

I'm writing an instruction document and want to use Typewriter family for
stuff that appears in an xterm--bold to indicate what the user should enter
via the keyboard, and plain (medium) Typewriter for stuff printed by the
computer. These look different on screen in LyX, but the dvi previewer
shows that the bold text is being rendered as plain; pdf output confirms
this--the text marked as plain Typewriter looks identical to text marked as
Typewriter, Bold. This is on a Linux box (Centos 5.3). What can I do about
this?


Use a typewriter font that provides bold shape (the LaTeX default font, 
computer modern, does not).


I have been using Latin Modern in all my docs for a while, and I have 
a code character style using plain typewriter and another one 
filename using typewriter bold. That works fine (windows XP, lyx 1.6.2).


Best regards,

Olivier



[Document  Settings  Fonts]

Jürgen





Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-05 Thread Olivier Ripoll

Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:

tedc wrote:

I'm writing an instruction document and want to use Typewriter family for
stuff that appears in an xterm--bold to indicate what the user should enter
via the keyboard, and plain (medium) Typewriter for stuff printed by the
computer. These look different on screen in LyX, but the dvi previewer
shows that the bold text is being rendered as plain; pdf output confirms
this--the text marked as plain Typewriter looks identical to text marked as
Typewriter, Bold. This is on a Linux box (Centos 5.3). What can I do about
this?


Use a typewriter font that provides bold shape (the LaTeX default font, 
computer modern, does not).


I have been using Latin Modern in all my docs for a while, and I have 
a code character style using plain typewriter and another one 
filename using typewriter bold. That works fine (windows XP, lyx 1.6.2).


Best regards,

Olivier



[Document  Settings  Fonts]

Jürgen





Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-05 Thread Olivier Ripoll

Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:

tedc wrote:

I'm writing an instruction document and want to use Typewriter family for
stuff that appears in an xterm--bold to indicate what the user should enter
via the keyboard, and plain ("medium") Typewriter for stuff printed by the
computer. These look different on screen in LyX, but the dvi previewer
shows that the "bold" text is being rendered as plain; pdf output confirms
this--the text marked as plain Typewriter looks identical to text marked as
Typewriter, Bold. This is on a Linux box (Centos 5.3). What can I do about
this?


Use a typewriter font that provides bold shape (the LaTeX default font, 
computer modern, does not).


I have been using "Latin Modern" in all my docs for a while, and I have 
a "code" character style using plain typewriter and another one 
"filename" using typewriter bold. That works fine (windows XP, lyx 1.6.2).


Best regards,

Olivier



[Document > Settings > Fonts]

Jürgen





Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-04 Thread Rich Shepard

On Mon, 4 May 2009, tedc wrote:


Could the problem lie in the typefaces themselves?


  Yes.

  Each typeface is defined by the available fonts. The font represents a
weight (normal, bold), a shape (upright, slanted, Italic, small caps), and a
point size (10, 12, 14). Not all typefaces are available in every weight,
shape, and size.

  If we think of the monospaced typewriter face, and we're old enough to
remember writing with typewriters (manual or electric), it makes sense that
a typeface representing the old typewritten output would have only medium
weight because typewriters could not do bold (or Italic for which
underlining was substituted). And, because all characters occupy the same
horizontal space (the width of the type arm in the typewriter) we were
taught to put two spaces after a period to make it easier to distinguish
sentences. With proportional-spaced fonts that's no longer necessary (or
desirable as you discover when you try it in LyX).

Rich

--
Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D.   |  IntegrityCredibility
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc.|Innovation
http://www.appl-ecosys.com Voice: 503-667-4517  Fax: 503-667-8863


Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-04 Thread Guenter Milde
On 2009-05-04, Rich Shepard wrote:
 On Mon, 4 May 2009, tedc wrote:

 Could the problem lie in the typefaces themselves?

Yes.

Each typeface is defined by the available fonts. The font represents a
 weight (normal, bold), a shape (upright, slanted, Italic, small caps), and a
 point size (10, 12, 14). Not all typefaces are available in every weight,
 shape, and size.

If you open DocumentLaTeX log, you will find lines telling you that the
font was not found in bold and substituted with normal weight...

The LaTeX Font Catalogue http://www.tug.dk/FontCatalogue/ lists examples
of monospaced fonts under
http://www.tug.dk/FontCatalogue/typewriterfonts.html
Click on the available fonts to see samples of supported features for
each.

Günter



Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-04 Thread Rich Shepard

On Mon, 4 May 2009, tedc wrote:


Could the problem lie in the typefaces themselves?


  Yes.

  Each typeface is defined by the available fonts. The font represents a
weight (normal, bold), a shape (upright, slanted, Italic, small caps), and a
point size (10, 12, 14). Not all typefaces are available in every weight,
shape, and size.

  If we think of the monospaced typewriter face, and we're old enough to
remember writing with typewriters (manual or electric), it makes sense that
a typeface representing the old typewritten output would have only medium
weight because typewriters could not do bold (or Italic for which
underlining was substituted). And, because all characters occupy the same
horizontal space (the width of the type arm in the typewriter) we were
taught to put two spaces after a period to make it easier to distinguish
sentences. With proportional-spaced fonts that's no longer necessary (or
desirable as you discover when you try it in LyX).

Rich

--
Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D.   |  IntegrityCredibility
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc.|Innovation
http://www.appl-ecosys.com Voice: 503-667-4517  Fax: 503-667-8863


Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-04 Thread Guenter Milde
On 2009-05-04, Rich Shepard wrote:
 On Mon, 4 May 2009, tedc wrote:

 Could the problem lie in the typefaces themselves?

Yes.

Each typeface is defined by the available fonts. The font represents a
 weight (normal, bold), a shape (upright, slanted, Italic, small caps), and a
 point size (10, 12, 14). Not all typefaces are available in every weight,
 shape, and size.

If you open DocumentLaTeX log, you will find lines telling you that the
font was not found in bold and substituted with normal weight...

The LaTeX Font Catalogue http://www.tug.dk/FontCatalogue/ lists examples
of monospaced fonts under
http://www.tug.dk/FontCatalogue/typewriterfonts.html
Click on the available fonts to see samples of supported features for
each.

Günter



Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-04 Thread Rich Shepard

On Mon, 4 May 2009, tedc wrote:


Could the problem lie in the typefaces themselves?


  Yes.

  Each typeface is defined by the available fonts. The font represents a
weight (normal, bold), a shape (upright, slanted, Italic, small caps), and a
point size (10, 12, 14). Not all typefaces are available in every weight,
shape, and size.

  If we think of the monospaced typewriter face, and we're old enough to
remember writing with typewriters (manual or electric), it makes sense that
a typeface representing the old typewritten output would have only medium
weight because typewriters could not do bold (or Italic for which
underlining was substituted). And, because all characters occupy the same
horizontal space (the width of the type arm in the typewriter) we were
taught to put two spaces after a period to make it easier to distinguish
sentences. With proportional-spaced fonts that's no longer necessary (or
desirable as you discover when you try it in LyX).

Rich

--
Richard B. Shepard, Ph.D.   |  IntegrityCredibility
Applied Ecosystem Services, Inc.|Innovation
 Voice: 503-667-4517  Fax: 503-667-8863


Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-04 Thread Guenter Milde
On 2009-05-04, Rich Shepard wrote:
> On Mon, 4 May 2009, tedc wrote:

>> Could the problem lie in the typefaces themselves?

>Yes.

>Each typeface is defined by the available fonts. The font represents a
> weight (normal, bold), a shape (upright, slanted, Italic, small caps), and a
> point size (10, 12, 14). Not all typefaces are available in every weight,
> shape, and size.

If you open Document>LaTeX log, you will find lines telling you that the
font was not found in bold and substituted with normal weight...

The LaTeX Font Catalogue http://www.tug.dk/FontCatalogue/ lists examples
of monospaced fonts under
http://www.tug.dk/FontCatalogue/typewriterfonts.html
Click on the available fonts to see samples of supported features for
each.

Günter



Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-02 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
tedc wrote:
 I'm writing an instruction document and want to use Typewriter family for
 stuff that appears in an xterm--bold to indicate what the user should enter
 via the keyboard, and plain (medium) Typewriter for stuff printed by the
 computer. These look different on screen in LyX, but the dvi previewer
 shows that the bold text is being rendered as plain; pdf output confirms
 this--the text marked as plain Typewriter looks identical to text marked as
 Typewriter, Bold. This is on a Linux box (Centos 5.3). What can I do about
 this?

Use a typewriter font that provides bold shape (the LaTeX default font, 
computer modern, does not).

[Document  Settings  Fonts]

Jürgen


Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-02 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
tedc wrote:
 I'm writing an instruction document and want to use Typewriter family for
 stuff that appears in an xterm--bold to indicate what the user should enter
 via the keyboard, and plain (medium) Typewriter for stuff printed by the
 computer. These look different on screen in LyX, but the dvi previewer
 shows that the bold text is being rendered as plain; pdf output confirms
 this--the text marked as plain Typewriter looks identical to text marked as
 Typewriter, Bold. This is on a Linux box (Centos 5.3). What can I do about
 this?

Use a typewriter font that provides bold shape (the LaTeX default font, 
computer modern, does not).

[Document  Settings  Fonts]

Jürgen


Re: Typewriter, Bold is indistinguishable from plain Typewriter

2009-05-02 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller
tedc wrote:
> I'm writing an instruction document and want to use Typewriter family for
> stuff that appears in an xterm--bold to indicate what the user should enter
> via the keyboard, and plain ("medium") Typewriter for stuff printed by the
> computer. These look different on screen in LyX, but the dvi previewer
> shows that the "bold" text is being rendered as plain; pdf output confirms
> this--the text marked as plain Typewriter looks identical to text marked as
> Typewriter, Bold. This is on a Linux box (Centos 5.3). What can I do about
> this?

Use a typewriter font that provides bold shape (the LaTeX default font, 
computer modern, does not).

[Document > Settings > Fonts]

Jürgen