Date: Wed, 18 Apr 2001 10:42:54 -0500 From: Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> To: James Howard <howardjp@well.com> Cc: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in>, Joseph Mallett <jmallett@newgold.net>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: banner(6) Message-ID: <15069.46590.744626.351144@guru.mired.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.21.0104180641460.517-100000@well.com> References: <4.3.2.7.2.20010418073758.00c99ef0@localhost> <Pine.GSO.4.21.0104180641460.517-100000@well.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
James Howard <howardjp@well.com> types: > On Wed, 18 Apr 2001, Brett Glass wrote: > > That's because Adobe misuses the term. I come from a family which > > includes several generations of typesetters and type designers. > > The correct meaning of the word "font" has existed for hundreds > > of years, and abuse by one company can't change it. > Everything Brett has said so far is confirmed by The Chicago Manual of > Style. Just a note. The only real point of disagreement is whether Adobe is correct in calling the collection of programs that produce renderings of a typeface a font, or whether that collection should be called a typeface. If the Chicago Manual of style actually discusses that, I'd love a reference for it. <mike -- Mike Meyer <mwm@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/home/mwm/ Independent WWW/Perforce/FreeBSD/Unix consultant, email for more information. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the messagehome | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15069.46590.744626.351144>