Saturday, February 8, 2020, 6:07:23 PM, you wrote:
>>>> See the line above which is in CMU Concrete! >> >>> ??? I use Emacs to read my e-mail, and emacs is configured to use >>> the font 'DejaVu Sans Mono' on my GNU/Linux box. This font >>> contains Cyrillic glyphs... >> >> I composed that line in the email using CMU Concrete. Presumably >> your email client changes that. > You have (correctly) sent a plain text e-mail, which doesn't preserve > any font information... Odd - I thought I'd sent it as text + HTML precisely to preserve the font! Oh well. >>> None of those fonts contain Cyrillic glyphs. >> >> OK, that's fine by me. I was confused as earlier emails referred to >> the font family, > Just for clarification. A font family 'Foo' > traditionally consists of > 'Foo Regular', 'Foo Bold', 'Foo Italic', and > 'Foo Bold Italic'. Some > font families contain *much* more series – Computer Modern (CM) is > such an example[1] – others contain only a > single one. The PDFs as > produced by texinfo use CM (plus some other, additional fonts, as > mentioned in a previous e-mail). > Note that 'CMU Concrete' is a completely > different thing; while based > on CM, it is not part of it. With 'part of it' I mean that > historically it wasn't part of the fonts that TeX has started many > years ago. I know nothing about the history of TeX or fonts. Thanks for the info. >> not the version of the font that are used in the documentation >> project, which you tell me is a subset. > What I'm talking about has nothing to do with font versions. I suggest that we now close this discussion as I was completely wrong in my understanding of CM fonts, their glyph set and their relation with LilyPond documentation. > Werner > [1] To be more precise, CM is a collection of various font families.