This is a
playground to test code. It runs a full
Node.js environment and already has all of
npm’s 1,000,000+ packages pre-installed, including
mingkwai-typesetter with all
npm packages installed. Try it out:
This service is provided by RunKit and is not affiliated with npm, Inc or the package authors.
A streaming MarkDown -> LaTeX (i.e. XeLaTeX, LuaLaTeX) -> PDF typesetter, implemented in CoffeeScript.
MingKwai TypeSetter (MKTS) uses
markdown-it* and, as such,
supports all the parts of CommonMark, the Common MarkDown
Spec that are supported by
markdown-it core—or any
available syntax plugin—offers, provided an adapter for the given feature has
been integrated into the MKTS processing pipeline.
*) this may change in the future, since
markdown-itdoes not currently support parsing sources in a piecemeal fashion as would be appropriate for an all-out streaming framework.
markdown-it accepts raw HTML tags, it is possible to 'escape to HTML' to
quickly get features not available in MarkDown as such; however, this also
presupposes that an HTML-to-TeX translation for the HTML tags has been implemented.*
*) at the time of this writng, no plug-in structure for syntax extensions has been establish, but that will hopefully change in the future.
The MKTS design philosophy rejects the idea of there being stylistic variations of a given typeface; instead, it treats each font (German: Schriftschnitt) as an entity in its own right.
what can be done algorithmically vs what can only be done by conscious choice by the designer
It turns out that in present day digital typesetting, all the algorithmic type variation that you can both get and actually use in a serious publication is retricted to, basically, scaling ( type size). You can squeeze and stretch type a teenie-weenie bit, but that's about it.
In theory underlines are very well within the reach of algorithmic type modification, but, astoundingly, in practice almost all underlined text looks ugly. That should not be the case, given how straightforward it is to add an underline to text. The Shady Characters website is a the rare exception; there, the designers went to lengths and devised ways to ensure that underlined text look good.[^There's a very interesting proposal for a CSS property
text-decoration-skipto provide for, inter alia, gaps in the underline where it would otherwise cross descenders; as of 2016, it hasn't been implemented in any browser, though.]
Some (like Knuth) would argue that even mere font scaling produces another font (Schriftschnitt), and this was indeed, by and large, the matter of affairs with movable type, where you had one case with, say Times Roman @ 12pt and a separate one with Times Roman @ 10pt.
But observe that (1) even Knuth probably did not provide hand-tailored separate masters for each of the envisioned type sizes, not even the several small and very small ones (citation needed); (2) Knuths multiple masters were probably done algorithmically with MetaFont (citation needed); and that (3) even in the olden days, designers used mechanical devices like pantographs to be able to just-so produce multiple sizes from the exact same urbild (some adjustments notwithstanding, like keeping hairlines to a certain minimum required widths—that's what we have font hinting and ClearType for in the digital world).