In article <bypvb1ge0z.fsf(a)bolzano.math.ethz.ch> Jan Vroonhof <vroonhof(a)math.ethz.ch> writes:
>> At present, it uses (I say this based on observation, not source
>> inspection) the font ascent to determine the line spacing.
>Which version did you use? I recall fixes regarding this be applied and..
20.4(Mule) and 21.2-b3(Mule). Haven't tried 21.0.
(By the way, could you point me to a description of what XEmacs
version numbers mean? I haven't found one in the obvious places, but
maybe I haven't looked.)
>....in my XEmacs 21.0 these do not overlap. X is homegrown X11R6.3 on
>Solaris 2.5.1. I used exactly the same fontspec.
They don't visually overlap, but the top of the circumflex is drawn in
the bottom pixel of the "f" `cell', and gets left behind.
>And I think most these have been eliminated too. Or at least should
>have been. I cannot remember seeing fly specks recently.
You're right; 21.2 seems much better than 20.4; I was confused.
Apologies to the fixers.
>> (1) XEmacs should treat outsize characters as it treats any other
>> random glyph, and increase the line height accordingly.
>I would say (1). TeX does 2, but TeX is not an editor.
I suppose what TeX does is more like (1), in that it looks at the
metrics of individual characters, and if they exceed the linespacing,
it increases the linespacing (in unmodified Plain TeX or most LaTeX
styles). But it's more like (2) in that it takes no account of where
the ink goes. But as you say, TeX is not an editor.