On 10/04/2025 23:44, Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez wrote:
Thu, 10 Apr 2025 21:55:53 +0700 Max Nikulin <mid:vt8m5t$dc9$1...@ciao.gmane.io>
My conclusion from earlier discussions is that it is a challenge to
configure fonts to a given user document. It may contain (besides
latin-1) Greek, Cyrillic, CJK, emoji.
My experience is that using lualatex in documents that combine
Cyrillic, German and Spanish is actually easy and does not get worse
with other character sets (like the box drawing characters).
\setmainfont{FreeSerif}
\setsansfont{FreeSans}
\setmonofont{FreeMono}
does quite a nice job. But then, using lualatex is out of question if
you want latex-preview.
Are there issues with PdfLaTeX and English+Cyrillic+German+Spanish?
Greek may be more tricky with PdfLaTeX, but most of Unicode fonts should
have glyphs, so LuaTeX may be a rescue. CJK and emoji are almost
certainly requires additional explicit configuration.
Is freefonts family usually available on Windows and MacOS?
I can say nothing concerning quality of this particular font set. Likely
it appeared in some web pages, but I did not care what specific font is
used and I have never set it explicitly for some document. Perhaps in my
mind Times is associated too tightly to MS Word 97 documents while
actual issues were not with font, but with other aspects of formatting
causing poor quality.
While browsers and office tries
hard to find some substitution if a requested font does not have a set
of glyphs, for LaTeX it is necessary to explicitly configure fonts for
every script. For PdfTeX it is even more tricky than for LuaTeX. In some
cases fonts installed system-wide and ones available for TeX engines are
not the same.
Could you please expand on this?
The cited paragraph has more than one statement, so I am unsure which
one is unclear. As to browsers, have you tried to specify some
font-family for a paragraph that contains characters that the font does
not have? My experience that if I have other suitable fonts installed
then I able able to read text.
For my earlier experiments with configuring fonts for LuaLaTeX see
Maxim Nikulin. Re: org-mode export to (latex) PDF. Sat, 17 Jul 2021
19:35:57 +0700.
https://list.orgmode.org/scuirf$m7o$1...@ciao.gmane.io
Later examples with e.g. "#+language: he" have been posted by others.
Likely it is necessary to have a set of documents to test patches.
Concerning available fonts, don't TeX distributions have their own
configuration files for fonts? Perhaps Juan Manuel mentioned that some
fonts installed for TeX may be unavailable for other applications. In
some cases (I hope rare ones) it may cause issues if detection of
available fonts will be implemented in Org.
Some Org users are not familiar with TeX, so configuring fonts is a
really difficult task for them.
This is why we are (once again) trying to find a recipe that we can
build into org-mode.
I have a hope that either Juergen or somebody else have convincing
arguments that due to progress in LuaTeX configuring of fonts is
becoming easier.
(On the other hand they do not need perfectly formatted document.)
What do you mean with this. (Humbly confused here...)
For example, you do not care too much concerning document quality. In
default LuaTeX configuration Latin Modern fonts are consistently used
for text and for math. The patch you suggested unconditionally changes
text fonts only, causes discrepancy with math. It may be considered a
regression for users who do not need scripts outside of (roughly)
latin-1 & Co. (OK, on the other hand some users do not like appearance
of Computer Modern and its descendants.)
Earlier I tried to raise the aspect with math fonts in
Max Nikulin. Re: [possible patch] Basic fontspec code for LuaLaTeX and
XelaTeX (was "LaTeX export: when is it more useful...") Mon, 11 Jul 2022
19:31:24 +0700.
https://list.orgmode.org/tah578$v34$1...@ciao.gmane.io
For routine documents, there is no point to bother too match what
specific font is used if all characters are recognizable.
If you are making a camera ready file to publish a book then
substitution of some character from unspecified font is a serious error.
Perhaps you have bought some fonts and you do not want that some low
quality one would be substituted due to a typo in configuration.
Ideally Org should allow users to choose *consistent* font configuration
from wide spread font families. Both variants: with fallback fonts and
with errors instead should be possible.
I do not mind that accessibility is important, but a year or two ago its
status in LaTeX was "in progress". Is it necessary to modify LaTeX
markup generated by org-export? Can it cause issues with older TeXLive
versions from stable/long time support Linux distributions?
No, that is exactly what we are trying to avoid. We would like a simple
way of configuring a default font set for those who don't want or haven't
yet not learnt to manage fonts in pdflatex/lualatex.
Sorry, now its me who is confused. Are you against support of
accessibility? (Of course for preview fragments it is likely of little use.)
P.S. In some cases it may be easier to get PDF from ODT or HTML
intermediate format.
No please! I've gone that path and then you need to install loads of extra
and sometimes redundant software to get something decent.
I do not suggest to make it the default option. Users just should be
aware that if the stuck with LaTeX issues, they may export to HTML and
to print to PDF from a browser. Not every document is full of math.
