Take the 2-minute tour ×
TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I understand its a late 80's book and the authors were justifiably proud of their new AMS Euler typeface when they wrote it. However, by today's display standards, I find it a bit lacking (atleast in my copy, no offense). The equations are not as pretty compared to standard TeX or even pre-TeX printing, the letters zig zag vertically sometimes, I dont know perhaps to make emphasis or avoid italics, which is not exactly visually pleasing, and there are typos.

I am so willing to read this book I'll order a new one if I'm convinced that modern editions have an improved typesetting. Does anybody know?

share|improve this question

1 Answer 1

up vote 15 down vote accepted

Typesetting-wise the book hasn't changed much since the second printing*. The fonts have remained the same; Concrete Roman for text and AMS Euler for math. Every printing after the first includes some improvements suggested by Hermann Zapf (the designer of AMS Euler). These include summation and product symbols to better match AMS Euler and lighter curly braces. The details are described by Knuth on pages 34 and 35 of his TUGboat article.

I'm not sure what you mean by letters zig-zagging vertically. Perhaps you are referring to the use of oldstyle equation numbers?

If it's the first edition you have, then the latest printing would be preferable for the new Section 5.8 of the second edition and correction of typos. The second edition also denotes the indicator function more clearly with brackets instead of parentheses.

*As far as I know. Perhaps a trained eye could correct me on this.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.