numerator is too high in \frac{3}{4}, in palatino
I've noticed the following issue with how high the numerator is placed, but only when using Palatino: \setupbodyfont[palatino] \starttext \startformula {3\over4}\quad {1\over2} \stopformula \stoptext The 3 and the 1 sit quite high above the division line, esp. in comparison with the gap below the line (above the 4 and the 2). The place okay without the \setupbodyfont[palatino], so maybe it is something incorrect in the font parameters? The fonts are (from 'pdffonts'): EUEJAR+TeXGyrePagella-Regular CID Type 0C Identity-H yes yes yes 18 0 UPBTGS+TeXGyrePagellaMath-Regular CID Type 0C Identity-H yes yes yes 19 0 And it is compiled with 2014.03.27 20:04 MKIV. Is there a way to adjust the spacing, or an alternative workaround? -Sanjoy
I just compared MkII and MkIV in this respect, and the MkII fraction looks more symmetric (more correct) than the MkIV version. Here is the MkII code: \usetypescript[palatino][ec] \setupbodyfont[palatino] \starttext \startformula {3\over4}\quad {1\over2} \stopformula \stoptext I've attached (cropped) images to show the difference. Another difference is in the fonts. For the MkII version, pdffonts gives IVJLXF+TeXGyrePagella-Regular Type 1 Custom yes yes no 4 0 IVJLXF+TeXGyrePagella-Regular Type 1 Custom yes yes no 5 0 For the MkIV version, pdffonts shows a math font (maybe for the thicker fractional bar): EUEJAR+TeXGyrePagella-Regular CID Type 0C Identity-H yes yes yes 18 0 UPBTGS+TeXGyrePagellaMath-Regular CID Type 0C Identity-H yes yes yes 19 0 If you have suggestions for how to change, slightly, the numerator and denominator placement when using alatino, let me know. Maybe the entire problem is that the division line is thicker in Palatino math than in the text font, and maybe sits below the math axis (so it gets too close to the denominator)? -Sanjoy
On 5/2/2014 4:46 AM, Sanjoy Mahajan wrote:
I've noticed the following issue with how high the numerator is placed, but only when using Palatino:
\setupbodyfont[palatino] \starttext \startformula {3\over4}\quad {1\over2} \stopformula \stoptext
The 3 and the 1 sit quite high above the division line, esp. in comparison with the gap below the line (above the 4 and the 2).
The place okay without the \setupbodyfont[palatino], so maybe it is something incorrect in the font parameters?
The fonts are (from 'pdffonts'):
EUEJAR+TeXGyrePagella-Regular CID Type 0C Identity-H yes yes yes 18 0 UPBTGS+TeXGyrePagellaMath-Regular CID Type 0C Identity-H yes yes yes 19 0
And it is compiled with 2014.03.27 20:04 MKIV.
these are font properties and using a consistent opentype math versus a bunch of loosely related type one fonts makes a difference keep in mind that a too small distance can give inconsistent output
Is there a way to adjust the spacing, or an alternative workaround?
I've added: \starttext $\displaystyle 1+{2g\over3}+{2\over3}$ \blank \setupmathfractions[topdistance=0pt] $\displaystyle 1+{2g\over3}+{2\over3}$ \blank \setupmathfractions[bottomdistance=0pt] $\displaystyle 1+{2g\over3}+{2\over3}$ \blank \setupmathfractions[topdistance=0pt,bottomdistance=0pt] $\displaystyle 1+{2g\over3}+{2\over3}$ \blank \stoptext ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | voip: 087 875 68 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
Hans Hagen
these are font properties and using a consistent opentype math versus a bunch of loosely related type one fonts makes a difference
But shouldn't TeXGyrePagellaMath qualify?
I've added:
\starttext
$\displaystyle 1+{2g\over3}+{2\over3}$ \blank
\setupmathfractions[topdistance=0pt]
$\displaystyle 1+{2g\over3}+{2\over3}$ \blank
\setupmathfractions[bottomdistance=0pt]
$\displaystyle 1+{2g\over3}+{2\over3}$ \blank
\setupmathfractions[topdistance=0pt,bottomdistance=0pt]
$\displaystyle 1+{2g\over3}+{2\over3}$ \blank
\stoptext
Thanks, Hans. That is very useful. I also recompiled my textbook draft using the latest beta (2014.05.17), and it works very well. I tried the topdistance and bottomdistance and they are mostly working. To my eye, with topdistance=6pt, the {1\over2} looks very good again. However, the settings don't seem to affect fractions inside square roots. Here's an example (the 20pt setting is to exaggerate the possible effect), using 2014.05.17 beta. \starttext \placeformula\startformula \dfrac{ag}{bcd}\quad{ag\over bcd} \stopformula \placeformula\startformula \sqrt{1\over \dfrac{a}{bcd}} \quad \sqrt{\dfrac{1}{\dfrac{a}{bcd}}} \stopformula \setupmathfractions [topdistance=20pt] \placeformula\startformula \dfrac{ag}{bcd}\quad{ag\over bcd} \stopformula \placeformula\startformula \sqrt{1\over \dfrac{a}{bcd}} \quad \sqrt{\dfrac{1}{\dfrac{a}{bcd}}} \stopformula \stoptext
participants (2)
-
Hans Hagen -
Sanjoy Mahajan