Hello Philipp,
On 14/05/2010, at 3:38 AM, Philiрp Rеichmuth wrote:
Am Wed, 12 May 2010 10:55:47 +0300 schrieb Khaled Hosny:
Or, alternatively, just use the proper unicode character in your
input
(though, I myself, find TeX notation a bit handy).
It would be even handier if it was easier to
Am Wed, 12 May 2010 10:55:47 +0300 schrieb Khaled Hosny:
> Or, alternatively, just use the proper unicode character in your input
> (though, I myself, find TeX notation a bit handy).
It would be even handier if it was easier to configure xunicode's glyph
replacement for precomposed characters.
Cu
On 12/05/2010, at 6:01 PM, Joachim Trinkwitz wrote:
As often stated on this list: it's easiest to use XeLaTeX by
loading the xltxtra package instead of fontspec, it gives you some
extra options and features and loads the fontspec and xunicode
packages by itself.
... and in the correct o
Am 12.05.2010 um 05:19 schrieb Nathan Camillo Sidoli:
> Is there a good way to get a long i with an overbar and no dot that can be
> changed by the environment to agree with the text that it belongs to.
> I am using \={\i} at the moment, but this seems to call in a special
> character which cann
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 12:19:23PM +0900, Nathan Camillo Sidoli wrote:
> Hello All,
>
> Is there a good way to get a long i with an overbar and no dot that
> can be changed by the environment to agree with the text that it
> belongs to.
>
> I am using \={\i} at the moment, but this seems to call
Hello All,
Is there a good way to get a long i with an overbar and no dot that can
be changed by the environment to agree with the text that it belongs to.
I am using \={\i} at the moment, but this seems to call in a special
character which cannot be modified. That is, it cannot be bold, ital
