https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=29544

--- Comment #8 from Richard Tollerton <[email protected]> 2011-06-25 
07:17:54 UTC ---
I tend to agree that the 0.8-1.0 range looks the best. I'd probably choose
gamma 1.0, for the simple fact that.... it's 1.

I've attached a rudimentary specimen LaTeX doc that covers most of the math
symbols documented on Wikipedia, plus a few sample formulas. From there, I
played with adjusting math fonts and sizes, to see if I could find anything
significantly better than cm at gamma 1.0. Lemme know if you want these PNGs
uploaded (they're big).

I particularly focused on sans- serifs under the hopes of killing two birds
with
one stone -- I suppose that, while we're on the topic of esoteric typesetting
issues, we probably shouldn't be pairing Computer Modern with whatever default
sans-serif font is used for the rest of Wikipedia :)

The Arev font looks *particularly* nice; even at gamma 0.5, it's quite weighty,
yet has clearly distinguishable boldfaces. But it seems to have three or four
significant rendering issues (specifically: capital "I", vertical var "|",
and over/underbraces) and I'm not a big fan of the parentheses.

If you can tolerate more blurriness, and 10-100x worse performance, you can
make convert upsample the equation by 2-4x, resample with a Gaussian filter,
then apply some ridiculously dark gamma setting. The filter's blurriness
gives the gamma compression a lot of room to work in, and unsurprisingly,
all of the rendering artifacts I originally mentioned vanish.

-- 
Configure bugmail: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.

_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to