Re: [NTG-context] The binomial coefficients do not look optimal
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 7:49 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
> On 9/1/2017 1:56 PM, Mikael P. Sundqvist wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I stumbled upon this (see the attached file for the result):
>>
>> %%% Test file
>> \setupbodyfont[10pt]
>> \starttext
>> \startTEXpage[offset=10pt]
>> \type{\tbinom{n}{k}}: $\tbinom{n}{k}$, (does not look good, the vertical
>> space between $n$ and $k$ is too big) \par
>> \type{\binom{n}{k}}: $\binom{n}{k}$ (looks fine to me)\par
>> \type{\dbinom{n}{k}}: $\dbinom{n}{k}$ (does not look good, too big
>> parenthesis, even for displayed formulas).\par
>> \stopTEXpage
>> \stoptext
>> %%% End of test file
>>
>> I think something should be changed to get the binomial coefficients to
>> look better. In particular I am concerned about the rather big parenthesis
>> in displaystyle (and not so much about the vertical space issue in \tbinom).
>>
>> /Mikael
>>
>> PS The result looked better if I used the lucida fonts, if that helps.
>>
> This is indeed font dependent. These binoms use a low level tex primitive
> that uses a threshold for steps and that one is part of the math parameters
> of a font and these are not that good for lm. As I'm looking into some
> other low level side effect I was in the mood for a configuration option
> for \setupmathfractions.
>
> So, in the next beta you can get the effects iof the attached:
>
> - relate the threshold to the bodyfont size
> - use normal left/right fences instead
>
> fwiw, cambria and pagella look better too. Upto you to wikify it.
>
> Hans
>
> -
> Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
> Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
>tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
> -
>
>
> ___
> If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to
> the Wiki!
>
> maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/
> listinfo/ntg-context
> webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
> archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
> wiki : http://contextgarden.net
>
> ___
>
Thank you very much, I'm looking forward to the next beta, and I will try
to wikify it when I have tried it out. Also lucida looks better than latin
modern does at the moment.
I am a bit confused about the different versions. I would have guessed that
there was \tbinom and \dbinom and that \binom used one of them depending on
if one is in text mode or in display mode (just as I would expect \frac to
behave like \tfrac in text mode and \dfrac in display mode). But \tbinom
looks very different from \binom in text mode (with more vertical space).
Is this on purpose? Have I missed something?
/Mikael
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
Re: [NTG-context] The binomial coefficients do not look optimal
On 9/1/2017 1:56 PM, Mikael P. Sundqvist wrote:
Hi,
I stumbled upon this (see the attached file for the result):
%%% Test file
\setupbodyfont[10pt]
\starttext
\startTEXpage[offset=10pt]
\type{\tbinom{n}{k}}: $\tbinom{n}{k}$, (does not look good, the vertical
space between $n$ and $k$ is too big) \par
\type{\binom{n}{k}}: $\binom{n}{k}$ (looks fine to me)\par
\type{\dbinom{n}{k}}: $\dbinom{n}{k}$ (does not look good, too big
parenthesis, even for displayed formulas).\par
\stopTEXpage
\stoptext
%%% End of test file
I think something should be changed to get the binomial coefficients to
look better. In particular I am concerned about the rather big
parenthesis in displaystyle (and not so much about the vertical space
issue in \tbinom).
/Mikael
PS The result looked better if I used the lucida fonts, if that helps.
This is indeed font dependent. These binoms use a low level tex
primitive that uses a threshold for steps and that one is part of the
math parameters of a font and these are not that good for lm. As I'm
looking into some other low level side effect I was in the mood for a
configuration option for \setupmathfractions.
So, in the next beta you can get the effects iof the attached:
- relate the threshold to the bodyfont size
- use normal left/right fences instead
fwiw, cambria and pagella look better too. Upto you to wikify it.
Hans
-
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
-
math-binom.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
[NTG-context] The binomial coefficients do not look optimal
Hi,
I stumbled upon this (see the attached file for the result):
%%% Test file
\setupbodyfont[10pt]
\starttext
\startTEXpage[offset=10pt]
\type{\tbinom{n}{k}}: $\tbinom{n}{k}$, (does not look good, the vertical
space between $n$ and $k$ is too big) \par
\type{\binom{n}{k}}: $\binom{n}{k}$ (looks fine to me)\par
\type{\dbinom{n}{k}}: $\dbinom{n}{k}$ (does not look good, too big
parenthesis, even for displayed formulas).\par
\stopTEXpage
\stoptext
%%% End of test file
I think something should be changed to get the binomial coefficients to
look better. In particular I am concerned about the rather big parenthesis
in displaystyle (and not so much about the vertical space issue in \tbinom).
/Mikael
PS The result looked better if I used the lucida fonts, if that helps.
ctx-example28.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the
Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki : http://contextgarden.net
___
