Goodbye WYSIWYG! 
Author Message
 Goodbye WYSIWYG!

Here is an amusing little experiment for people with a Mac and a PS printer.

Go into your favourite word processing application
(MS Word, Quark, Pagemaker, whatever).
Select your favourite text font
(Times-Roman, Helvetica, Palatino, whatever).
Choose a large font size, let's say 48pt.

Type a number of `logicalnot's (option-l), let's say a dozen.
Go to the next line and select the Symbol font.
Type a number of `logicalnot's (option-u y), let's say a dozen.

Repeat for `mu' (option-m) in Times, and `mu' (m) in Symbol.

Repeat for `plusminus' (shift-option-=) in Times, and the same in Symbol.

Repeat for `divide' (option-/) in Times and `divide' (shift-option-p) in Symbol

Now look at the display:  alternating lines are in different fonts,
and show somewhat different glyphs, with different advance widths,
as you would expect.

Now, print the page on your postscript printer. Compare with on-screen display.

For those of you who don't want to be bothered actually doing the experiment:  

*       in the printed results alternating lines look _exactly_ the same,
*       that is, the same glyphs, and the same line length.  Goodbye WYSIWYG!

Clearly ATM gets it right, and the Apple LaserWriter printer driver does not.
Now I know _why_ this is happening, and I have heard the apologist's
explanations, what I want to know is when it is going to get fixed!

P.S.    The same problem occurs for a few other characters,
        such as `degree' (shift-option-8) and `fraction' (shift-option-1),
        but is less dramatic because the advance widths for these characters
        happen to match in Times-Roman and in Symbol.

        The problem _can_ affect a total of up to 20 `mathematical' glyphs that
        occur in Macintosh `standard roman encoding,' but are `borrowed'
        from the `Symbol' font --- even when the text font _has_ the glyph.

Berthold K.P. Horn
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA



Wed, 16 Aug 1995 11:33:28 GMT  
 Goodbye WYSIWYG!

: Here is an amusing little experiment for people with a Mac and a PS printer.

: Go into your favourite word processing application
: (MS Word, Quark, Pagemaker, whatever).
: Select your favourite text font
: (Times-Roman, Helvetica, Palatino, whatever).
: Choose a large font size, let's say 48pt.

: Type a number of `logicalnot's (option-l), let's say a dozen.
: Go to the next line and select the Symbol font.
: Type a number of `logicalnot's (option-u y), let's say a dozen.

: Repeat for `mu' (option-m) in Times, and `mu' (m) in Symbol.

: Repeat for `plusminus' (shift-option-=) in Times, and the same in Symbol.

: Repeat for `divide' (option-/) in Times and `divide' (shift-option-p) in Symbol

: Now look at the display:  alternating lines are in different fonts,
: and show somewhat different glyphs, with different advance widths,
: as you would expect.

: Now, print the page on your PostScript printer. Compare with on-screen display.

: For those of you who don't want to be bothered actually doing the experiment:  

: *     in the printed results alternating lines look _exactly_ the same,
: *     that is, the same glyphs, and the same line length.  Goodbye WYSIWYG!

Berthold,
Maybe apple didn't expect that you'd want to look at lines like those???
:=))

--
---------------------------------------------------------------------------


                     tel.415.553.4033
---------------------------------------------------------------------------



Fri, 18 Aug 1995 10:58:34 GMT  
 Goodbye WYSIWYG!

Quote:
>Here is an amusing little experiment for people with a Mac and a PS printer.

        Interesting.  I just tried it with MS Word 5.0 on System 7.0.1 with
ATM printing to a Apple LaserWriter IIg printer.  The mu's, +/-'s, and
divides all came out looking identical, but the logical nots did not; they
retained their distinct widths (although I can't say if they retained their
character shapes, one logical not pretty much looks like another).

Quote:
>Clearly ATM gets it right, and the Apple LaserWriter printer driver does not.
>Now I know _why_ this is happening, and I have heard the apologist's
>explanations, what I want to know is when it is going to get fixed!

        OK, my curiosity is piqued.  Why does it happen?
--

Hippocrates Project, Department of Microbiology, Coles 202
NYU School of Medicine, 550 First Avenue, New York, NY 10016
"This never happened to Bart Simpson."


Mon, 21 Aug 1995 06:16:45 GMT  
 
 [ 3 post ] 

 Relevant Pages 

1. Goodbye!

2. WYSIWYG-Editor

3. - a WYSIWYG design tool for DHTML-based banner ads: [B3 dBanner Studio]

4. - a WYSIWYG Authoring Tool for DHTML Dialogs: [B3 HTML Dialogs]

5. WYSIWYG Postscript Editor

6. WYSIWYG Postscript file editor?

7. Adobe Acro Reader isnt WYSIWYG in printing.....

8. wysiwyg-editor

9. I need wysiwyg edit control

10. Viewing Postcript WYSIWYG

11. DSN-less Connection without WYSIWYG program, fist time...

12. Question: common wysiwyg enterface?

 

 
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software