Home > Archive > Tex > May 2006 > mission symbols in MnSymbol
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
mission symbols in MnSymbol
|
|
|
| Hi!
I'm currently using the minionpro and mnsymbol packages for my PhD thesis.
The fonts look very nice, thanks to everyone who made this possible.
I've got a few small issues though:
I'm not very satisfied with the integral signs. Without the [minionint]
option to MnSymbol, the integral sign looks very plain and out of
place. With the [minionint] option, on the other hand, the integral
sign fits better with the rest of the font, but it seems to be a bit
too bold; also the kerning of the upper integration boundary is bad.
I'd prefer to use a less bold version of the [minionint] integral sig,
and fix the kerning somehow. Does anyone have an idea on how to do
that (if at all possible)?
The second issue I'm having, are a few missing symbols in the MnSymbol
packages. Specifically, I'd like to use \lesssim and \gtrsim, both of
which are currently undefined in the MnSymbol package.
I guess it should be possible to combine the < and > chars with a \sim
to get them; however, \kern and \lower, which I wanted to use to
combine them, don't seem to function in math mode. Could anyone point
me to an other way to make these chars?
Thanks for any comments!
--
BZ
| |
| Michael Zedler 2006-05-24, 7:11 pm |
| BZ schrieb:
> Hi!
>
> I'm currently using the minionpro and mnsymbol packages for my PhD thesis.
> The fonts look very nice, thanks to everyone who made this possible.
>
> I've got a few small issues though:
>
> I'm not very satisfied with the integral signs. Without the [minionint]
> option to MnSymbol, the integral sign looks very plain and out of
> place. With the [minionint] option, on the other hand, the integral
> sign fits better with the rest of the font, but it seems to be a bit
> too bold; also the kerning of the upper integration boundary is bad.
> I'd prefer to use a less bold version of the [minionint] integral sig,
> and fix the kerning somehow. Does anyone have an idea on how to do
> that (if at all possible)?
Concerning the [minionint] option:
Without opticals in displayed equation the MinionPro integral is indeed
slightly too bold. This cannot be changed, because you simply lack the
less bold ItDisp font.
Please provide a minimal example showing the bad placement of the upper
integration limit.
> The second issue I'm having, are a few missing symbols in the MnSymbol
> packages. Specifically, I'd like to use \lesssim and \gtrsim, both of
> which are currently undefined in the MnSymbol package.
> I guess it should be possible to combine the < and > chars with a \sim
> to get them; however, \kern and \lower, which I wanted to use to
> combine them, don't seem to function in math mode. Could anyone point
> me to an other way to make these chars?
Please repost this as well as the MnSymbol-integral decoration issue on
the mailing list; http://developer.berlios.de/projects/minionpro/.
Michael
| |
|
| Michael Zedler wrote in comp.text.tex:
>
> Concerning the [minionint] option:
> Without opticals in displayed equation the MinionPro integral is indeed
> slightly too bold. This cannot be changed, because you simply lack the
> less bold ItDisp font.
Ah ok. So buying this
http://www.fonts.com/findfonts/detail.htm?pid=201878
additional font would solve that issue?
> Please provide a minimal example showing the bad placement of the upper
> integration limit.
See http://zoetekouw.net/Zooi/formula.png
The placement of the a is correct, but the b is too far to the left.
The code for this integral was simply:
4\pi{a^2} c_{\mathrm{s}} \int_{a}^{b} \mathrm{d}r
>
> Please repost this as well as the MnSymbol-integral decoration issue on
> the mailing list; http://developer.berlios.de/projects/minionpro/.
I will.
Thanks for your help so far.
--
BZ
| |
|
|
|
|
|