5 ms·

Rendering text is only a small part of typography. A significant part, sure, but not all of it by far. For your consideration, this is the manual for KOMA-Scri

Rendering text is only a small part of typography. A significant part, sure, but not all of it by far. For your consideration, this is the manual for KOMA-Script: https://mirror.las.iastate.edu/tex-archive/macros/latex/contrib/koma-script/doc/scrguien.pdf https://mirror.las.iastate.edu/tex-archive/macros/latex/cont... That's 552 pages worth of typography that only considers page layouting. It doesn't deal with fonts or kerning at all. It's actually a fun read even if just for the author's occasional frustration with how often laymen confidently ignore centuries-old typography rules that exists for a reason.

M_Bakhtiari 8y ago
Does it say anywhere in that manual why the right margin is supposed to be so narrow? I find it very uncomfortable to read texts with very narrow margins.
jacobush 8y ago
I am now more tempted to and also more scared of LaTex than ever before.
nabla9 8y ago
The context for the discussion is browser rendering for variable sized screens and user interaction in mind. Centuries-old typography rules can't be applied directly for screens. For paper documents you can already do Markup -> LatTeX -> pdf for good quality documents.
- HerrMonnezza 8y ago
  > Centuries-old typography rules can't be applied directly for screens. Some of it, certainly not. A (larger IMHO) part of typography wisdom has really been distilled from experience making text easier and prettier to read over generations, and should not be thrown away lightheartedly because "screen is different from paper". Yes it is, but human eyes and brain are the same ;-)
  - nabla9 8y ago
    Human eyes and brains don't necessarily treat screen the same way they treat read paper.
enriquto 8y ago
wow! the KOMA-script documentation must be the most unreadable LaTeX document I've ever seen - no margin on the binding side - silly colors everywhere - mixes normal and reverse text for no reason - uses german typographical conventions but the text is in english - extreme abuse of monospace italics - mixed serif/sans/monospace/boldface on every page - nonstandard paper size (18x21 cm) All of this could be expected, and not too worrying, for a text about any subject, except a fucking document about page layout!
- blattimwind 8y ago
  The online and the book versions are different w.r.t. margins, colors etc. The online version highlights everything you can click and has tiny margins to avoid on-screen whitespace.
  - outadoc 8y ago
    Tiny margins... but only on one side. Because it still has weird version labels in the left margin, so it all looks asymetrical. Whyyy!
  - enriquto 8y ago
    > The online version highlights everything you can click and has tiny margins to avoid on-screen whitespace. This is ridiculously condescending... everybody is able to zoom-in with their pdf viewer.
    - Eldt 8y ago
      What about this is condescending?
      - etatoby 8y ago
        "Here, good boy, I know you can't be expected to know how to zoom your PDF file, so I'll just prepare a version for you without the margins and with some colors or something. Here, take a cookie. Good boy."
herpes 8y ago
Is there supposed to be no margin on the right side, or is my phone being an ass?

M_Bakhtiari 8y ago

Does it say anywhere in that manual why the right margin is supposed to be so narrow? I find it very uncomfortable to read texts with very narrow margins.

jacobush 8y ago

I am now more tempted to and also more scared of LaTex than ever before.

nabla9 8y ago

The context for the discussion is browser rendering for variable sized screens and user interaction in mind. Centuries-old typography rules can't be applied directly for screens. For paper documents you can already do Markup -> LatTeX -> pdf for good quality documents.

HerrMonnezza 8y ago
> Centuries-old typography rules can't be applied directly for screens. Some of it, certainly not. A (larger IMHO) part of typography wisdom has really been distilled from experience making text easier and prettier to read over generations, and should not be thrown away lightheartedly because "screen is different from paper". Yes it is, but human eyes and brain are the same ;-)
- nabla9 8y ago
  Human eyes and brains don't necessarily treat screen the same way they treat read paper.

enriquto 8y ago

wow! the KOMA-script documentation must be the most unreadable LaTeX document I've ever seen - no margin on the binding side - silly colors everywhere - mixes normal and reverse text for no reason - uses german typographical conventions but the text is in english - extreme abuse of monospace italics - mixed serif/sans/monospace/boldface on every page - nonstandard paper size (18x21 cm) All of this could be expected, and not too worrying, for a text about any subject, except a fucking document about page layout!

blattimwind 8y ago
The online and the book versions are different w.r.t. margins, colors etc. The online version highlights everything you can click and has tiny margins to avoid on-screen whitespace.
- outadoc 8y ago
  Tiny margins... but only on one side. Because it still has weird version labels in the left margin, so it all looks asymetrical. Whyyy!
- enriquto 8y ago
  > The online version highlights everything you can click and has tiny margins to avoid on-screen whitespace. This is ridiculously condescending... everybody is able to zoom-in with their pdf viewer.
  - Eldt 8y ago
    What about this is condescending?
    - etatoby 8y ago
      "Here, good boy, I know you can't be expected to know how to zoom your PDF file, so I'll just prepare a version for you without the margins and with some colors or something. Here, take a cookie. Good boy."

herpes 8y ago

Is there supposed to be no margin on the right side, or is my phone being an ass?