[NTG-context] Not seeing the wood because of so many trees

Hans Hagen ntg-context@ntg.nl
Fri, 20 Feb 2004 09:36:50 +0100

At 09:17 17/02/2004, Thomas A.Schmitz wrote:
>Sorry for going back to an older thread, but I don't think the question 
>was answered properly. Alexander Klink wanted to know how to typeset "{" 
>and "}". Suggestions were "\type|{| and \type|}|" or "$\{$ and $\}$". 
>Neither of which is satisfactory, because it will typeset them either in 
>typewriter or in math font. We had a discussion about similar questions a 
>while ago. I still think we should have "\{" and "\}" for
>this kind of thing. As long as this isn't available, I see no better 
>solution than "\getglyph{Serif}{123}" and "\getglyph{Serif}{125}" vel. 
>sim. For those of us working in the humanities, these curly braces are 
>sometimes necessary (e.g., in critical editions), and having them in 
>typewriter or math fonts isn't acceptable. So may I continue my rally for 
>\{ etc.?

The problem is that the cmr fonts are not that complete. Once we switch to 
the lmr fonts, this problem will disappear (sincethen we can use other 
encoding vectors)


                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE/POD/CTS
                       Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
  tel: +31 (0)38 477 53 69 | fax: +31 (0)38 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
                        information: http://www.pragma-ade.com/roadmap.pdf
                     documentation: http://www.pragma-ade.com/showcase.pdf