Fake bold/italic font styles

[johannschopplich]

Using asterisks or rather the bold/italic markdown syntax results in fake displayed fonts, because the real font styles are missing.

I recommend implementing the missing styles like this:

@font-face {
  font-family: ComputerModern;
  src: url('ComputerModern-Regular.otf') format('otf');
  font-weight: 400;
  font-style: normal;
  font-stretch: normal;
}
@font-face {
  font-family: ComputerModern;
  src: url('ComputerModern-RegularItalic.otf') format('otf');
  font-weight: 400;
  font-style: italic;
  font-stretch: normal;
}
@font-face {
  font-family: ComputerModern;
  src: url('ComputerModern-Bold.otf') format('otf');
  font-weight: 700;
  font-style: normal;
  font-stretch: normal;
}
@font-face {
  font-family: ComputerModern;
  src: url('ComputerModern-BoldItalic.otf') format('otf');
  font-weight: 700;
  font-style: italic;
  font-stretch: normal;
}

[josephernest]

Thanks! Can you provide a live demo of your fork implementing these changes?
What is the source for these files/is their license ok for using it here?

[josephernest]

Re @jschopplich I'm very interested. Could you do a pull request with the relevant files?
I used cmunrm.otf and this source: http://cm-unicode.sourceforge.net/

[johannschopplich]

I created a pull request the day you asked for one. 😄 I just didn't know how to link it to this issue:

Here it is: #23

[josephernest]

Ohhh my bad, I didn't see it, so sorry @jschopplich !
I implemented bold in the meantime, between our 2 messages. I'll see if I can merge.

[johannschopplich]

I initially thought there was no interest no more, but now I'm proven wrong! So I'm glad, too, @josephernest .

Yes, I saw your recent commit. But your implementation of just adding styles for tags isn't the right way to go. It's better to add the correct font-face; no need for adding styles for e.g. strong.
font-weight: 700; takes care of that. 700 is just the short version for bold.

I suggest either you revert your commit (because of the merge conflicts) or I update my pull request. The first suggestion should be faster/easier. Then you can also merge my 2nd pull request: #24 which would be great.

[josephernest]

I added your suggestion in my the last commit.

Remark: I didn't use cmunbx.otf, as you suggested, because this seems to be Serif Bold Extended Roman, and I think we don't need extended here.
Also cmunti.otf doesn't seem to be exactly the same Roman font as the non-italic one (see the lowercase g in both fonts), that's why I didn't include it for now. More generally, I don't understand the naming convention cmun*.otf, and I didn't find exactly a CMU Serif Roman Italic.

PS: where did you find ComputerModern-RegularItalic.otf, ComputerModern-Regular.otf, as you suggested in your first post in this issue? Maybe this would be a better source for these fonts?

[johannschopplich]

Thanks for pushing the code.

As for Computer Modern's naming scheme, I don't understand them either. The original as well as official source is: https://sourceforge.net/projects/cm-unicode/. I just renamed both italic and bold styles to ComputerModern-RegularItalic.otf and ComputerModern-Regular.otf respectively for clarity.
That's right. Nevertheless it seemes Serif Bold Extended Roman actually is used as bold style. Also there was no other bold font fitting close to the normal one. I couldn't find any information on that topic in the WWW. But comparing both fonts with some TeX-parsed documents it seemes those are the right picks.