> Also this: https://practicaltypography.com/bold-or-italic.html
IMHO, these advices are not applicable for technical documentation,
since different kinds of meta-ness *do* make sense.
Werner
On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 02:44:18PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
>
> My preference is to use and to remove the outer (corresponding
> to @r).
Looks good to me, I'll implement.
--
Pat
On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 1:53 PM Gavin Smith wrote:
> Side issue but slanted bold typewriter is likely not available as a font
> and font commands in Texinfo don't (usually?) nest, so @strong would switch
> to a bold Roman font regardless of the current style.
Just for fun https://imgflip.com/i/6o
On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 03:18:22PM +0200, pertu...@free.fr wrote:
> > When would a @def* block be inheriting font styles that we would need to
> > cancel?
>
> There is @def* in @example and similar, though this is not a
> very important use. The idea, here, was to be more in line with
> TeX/LaTeX
On Tue, Aug 02, 2022 at 01:20:50PM +0100, Gavin Smith wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 12:56:23AM +0200, pertu...@free.fr wrote:
> > > What was the benefit of changing to
> > > ? Isn't the former much simpler?
> >
> > It is not the same, isolates from the surrounding
> > fonts, using amounts t
On Mon, Aug 01, 2022 at 12:56:23AM +0200, pertu...@free.fr wrote:
> > What was the benefit of changing to
> > ? Isn't the former much simpler?
>
> It is not the same, isolates from the surrounding
> fonts, using amounts to really doing
> the same as in LaTeX (and, I believe, TeX).
I thought w
