Différences

Ci-dessous, les différences entre deux révisions de la page.

Lien vers cette vue comparative

Les deux révisions précédentesRévision précédente
Prochaine révision
Révision précédente
composition:texte:symboles:pourquoi_ne_pas_utiliser_bf_et_it [2018/05/24 17:02] joseph.wrightcomposition:texte:symboles:pourquoi_ne_pas_utiliser_bf_et_it [2021/01/08 23:05] (Version actuelle) – Suppression de la page désormais déplacée. yannick.tanguy
Ligne 1: Ligne 1:
---- 
-section: Common misunderstandings 
-subsection: Why shouldn't I? 
-permalink: /FAQ-2letterfontcmd 
-date: 2014-06-10 
---- 
- 
-# What's wrong with `\bf`, `\it`, etc.? 
- 
-The font-selection commands of LaTeX 2.09 were `\rm`, `\sf`, 
-`\tt`, `\it`, `\sl`, `\em` and `\bf`; they were modal 
-commands, so you used them as: 
-```latex 
-{\bf Fred} was {\it here\/}. 
-``` 
-with the font change enclosed in a group, so as to limit its effect; 
-note the italic correction command `\/` that was necessary at the 
-end of a section in italics. 
- 
-At the release of LaTeX 2e in summer 1994, these simple commands were 
-deprecated, but recognising that their use is deeply embedded in the 
-brains of LaTeX users, the commands themselves remain in LaTeX, 
-_with their LaTeX 2.09 semantics_.  Those semantics were part of 
-the reason they were deprecated: each `_xx_` overrides 
-any other font settings, keeping only the size.  So, for example, 
-```latex 
-{\bf\it Here we are again\/} 
-``` 
-ignores `\bf` and produces text in italic, medium weight (and the 
-italic correction has a real effect), whereas 
-```latex 
-{\it\bf happy as can be\/} 
-``` 
-ignores `\it` and produces upright text at bold weight (and the 
-italic correction has nothing to do).  The same holds if you mix 
-LaTeX 2e font selections with the old style commands: 
-```latex 
-\textbf{\tt all good friends} 
-``` 
-ignores the `\textbf` that encloses the text, and produces 
-typewriter text at medium weight. 
- 
-So why are these commands deprecated? — it is because of confusions 
-such as that in the last example.  The alternative (LaTeX 2e) 
-commands are discussed in the rest of this answer. 
- 
-LaTeX 2e's font commands come in two forms: modal commands and 
-text-block commands.  The default set of modal commands offers weights 
-`\mdseries` and `\bfseries`, shapes `\upshape`, 
-`\itshape`, `\scshape` and `\slshape`, and families 
-`\rmfamily`, `\sffamily` and `\ttfamily`.  A font selection 
-requires a family, a shape and a series (as well as a size, of 
-course).  A few examples 
-```latex 
-{\bfseries\ttfamily and jolly good company!} 
-``` 
-produces bold typewriter text (but note the lack of a  
-  [bold typewriter font](FAQ-bold-extras.md) 
-in the default Computer Modern fonts), or 
-```latex 
-{\slshape\sffamily Never mind the weather\/} 
-``` 
-(note the italic correction needed on slanted fonts, too). 
- 
-LaTeX 2e's text block commands take the first two letters of the 
-modal commands, and form a `\text`_`xx`_ command from 
-them.  Thus `\bfseries` becomes `\textbf{text}`, 
-`\itshape` becomes `\textit{text}`, and `\ttfamily` 
-becomes `\texttt{text}`.  Block commands may be nested, as: 
-```latex 
-\textit{\textbf{Never mind the rain}} 
-``` 
-to produce bold italic text (note that the block commands supply 
-italic corrections where necessary), and they be nested with the 
-LaTeX 2e modal commands, too: 
-```latex 
-\texttt{\bfseries So long as we're together} 
-``` 
-for bold typewriter, or 
-```latex 
-{\slshape \textbf{Whoops!  she goes again}\/} 
-``` 
-for a bold slanted instance of the current family (note the italic 
-correction applied at the end of the modal command group, again). 
- 
-The new commands (as noted above) override commands of the same type. 
-In almost all cases, this merely excludes ludicrous ideas such as 
-''upright slanted'' fonts, or ''teletype roman'' fonts.  There are a 
-couple of immediate oddities, though.  The first is the conflict 
-between `\itshape` (or `\slshape`) and `\scshape`: while many 
-claim that an italic small-caps font is typographically unsound, such 
-fonts do exist.  Daniel Taupin's [`smallcap`](https://ctan.org/pkg/smallcap) package enables 
-use of the instances in the [EC fonts](FAQ-ECfonts.md), and 
-similar techniques could be brought to bear on many other font sets. 
-The second is the conflict between `\upshape` and `\itshape`: 
-Knuth actually offers an upright-italic font which LaTeX uses for 
-the ''£'' symbol in the default font set.  The combination is 
-sufficiently weird that, while there's a defined font shape, no 
-default LaTeX commands exist; to use the shape, the (eccentric) user 
-needs LaTeX's simplest font selection commands: 
-```latex 
-{\fontshape{ui}\selectfont Tra la la, di dee} 
-``` 
- 
  
3_composition/texte/symboles/pourquoi_ne_pas_utiliser_bf_et_it.1527181322.txt.gz · Dernière modification : 2018/05/24 17:02 de joseph.wright
CC Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International
Driven by DokuWiki Recent changes RSS feed Valid CSS Valid XHTML 1.0