# [Foxet] fonts again

h h extern pragma at wxs.nl
Sun Apr 3 22:40:47 CEST 2005

```Adam Lindsay wrote:
> Bruce D'Arcus said this at Sun, 3 Apr 2005 14:16:07 -0400:
>
>
>>
>>
>>>Okay, you name 'Gill Sans' as the font family here, but to a computer,
>>>'Gill Sans' is not the same as 'GillSans' down below, right?
>>
>>Part of the problem is that I've never really understood the logic of
>>HOW ConTeXt thinks about fonts.  It's incredibly frustrating; right up
>>there with trying to understand xml namespaces in a deep way!
>
>
> Even more frustrating is how foXet adds a slightly different, somewhat
> more modern and flexible way of thinking about fonts.

hm, but it lacks a consistent body font model

> For me, the metaphor of pachinko keeps coming up when thinking about
> fonts in ConTeXt: each font synonym sets up another pin to bounce off

it's indeed a chain of mappings, but the advantage is that (in context) one can
use symbolic names all over the place, like

\definefont[TitleFont][SerifBold at 50pt]

without bothering what SerifBold actually is (Palatino-Bold, PalatinoBold,

[btw, in my opinion fo by design is platform dependent with regards to fonts]

Hans

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