Am 06.06.2010 um 18:11 schrieb George N. White III:
cmsy is still being used somehow, somewhere:
Page numbers, footnote marks – you could try to disable page numbers
and leave footnotes for another try...
--
Greetings
Pete
There's no place like ~
– (UNIX Guru)
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 3:10 PM, Will Robertson wrote:
> On 2010-06-07 01:41:41 +0930, "George N. White III" said:
>
>> I replaced the accent macros with unicode glyphs, e.g. Möbius, Poincar
>> é, etc.
>> One AMS text symbol (\S --> §) generated and undefined.
>
> Have you loaded xunicode?
No (
On 2010-06-07 01:41:41 +0930, "George N. White III"
said:
I replaced the accent macros with unicode glyphs, e.g. Möbius, Poincar
é, etc.
One AMS text symbol (\S --> §) generated and undefined.
Have you loaded xunicode?
cmsy is still being used somehow, somewhere:
Needs to be fixed. But
On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 01:11:41PM -0300, George N. White III wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
>
> > You can now grap the four styles from git tree:
> > http://github.com/khaledhosny/xits-math
> >
> > No proper release yet, but if no serious bugs appeared in the next 2
On Sun, Jun 6, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> You can now grap the four styles from git tree:
> http://github.com/khaledhosny/xits-math
>
> No proper release yet, but if no serious bugs appeared in the next 24
> hours, I'll make one.
>
> For text use "XITS", and "XITS Math" for math.
Tha
> You can now grap the four styles from git tree:
> http://github.com/khaledhosny/xits-math
>
> No proper release yet, but if no serious bugs appeared in the next 24
> hours, I'll make one.
>
> For text use "XITS", and "XITS Math" for math.
>
> Regards,
> Khaled
Thank you very much, Khaled! That
On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 08:28:08PM -0700, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 04:02:15PM -0700, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu
> > wrote:
> >> > On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 02:52:13PM -0700, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > I'm actually planning to includ
> On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 04:02:15PM -0700, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu
> wrote:
>> > On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 02:52:13PM -0700, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > I'm actually planning to include the rest of STIX styles in some
>> later
>> >> > release, STIX surpasses Termes in its
> On 06/05/2010 04:18 AM, Will Robertson wrote:
>> If you ask me, I can add this as an option somewhere in the package.
>> (I've seen old-style figures in maths in examples before, but never "in
>> the wild".)
>
> I have, in A. N. Whitehead’s “An Introduction to Mathematics”; search
> for the text
On 06/05/2010 04:18 AM, Will Robertson wrote:
> If you ask me, I can add this as an option somewhere in the package.
> (I've seen old-style figures in maths in examples before, but never "in
> the wild".)
I have, in A. N. Whitehead’s “An Introduction to Mathematics”; search
for the text “other fun
On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 04:02:15PM -0700, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 02:52:13PM -0700, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> > I'm actually planning to include the rest of STIX styles in some later
> >> > release, STIX surpasses Termes in its Greek and C
> On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 02:52:13PM -0700, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu
> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm actually planning to include the rest of STIX styles in some later
>> > release, STIX surpasses Termes in its Greek and Cyrillic coverage.
>> >
>> > If there is a real demand, I can do it earlier, but the on
On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 02:52:13PM -0700, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu wrote:
>
> > I'm actually planning to include the rest of STIX styles in some later
> > release, STIX surpasses Termes in its Greek and Cyrillic coverage.
> >
> > If there is a real demand, I can do it earlier, but the only impro
> I'm actually planning to include the rest of STIX styles in some later
> release, STIX surpasses Termes in its Greek and Cyrillic coverage.
>
> If there is a real demand, I can do it earlier, but the only improvement
> I see over regular STIX will be fractions and oldstyle figures.
I think it's
On 06/05/2010 08:54 PM, George N. White III wrote:
STIX is a very ambitious project for a group (scientific and technical
publishers), some who have suffered financially since the project started.
I think the technical work is a very minor portion of the overall effort (e.g.,
getting the Unicode
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 3:50 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 03:57:53AM +0930, Will Robertson wrote:
>> On 2010-06-06 02:54:13 +0930, Taco Hoekwater
>> said:
>>
>> >Will Robertson wrote:
>> >>On 2010-06-06 01:28:46 +0930, Eelis van der Weegen
>> >> said:
>> >>
>> >>>If so, to wh
On 06/05/2010 07:24 PM, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
If so, to what extent would this make XITS obsolete?
Depends how good a job they do :)
And whether the current STIX release schedule is reliable. Judging
from past results, it is altogether possible that v1.1 won't be
ready for release for half a
>Goodness is in the eye of the beholder. I expect some
>scientific publishers will expect STIX to be used in MS
>submissions. Large organizations may require Cambria
>or STIX for documents (PDF?) that will be archived for
>future generations. Commercial tools may be tweaked to
>compensate for bu
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Will Robertson wrote:
> On 2010-06-06 02:54:13 +0930, Taco Hoekwater said:
>
>> Will Robertson wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2010-06-06 01:28:46 +0930, Eelis van der Weegen
>>> said:
>>>
If so, to what extent would this make XITS obsolete?
>>>
>>> Depends how good a job
On Sun, Jun 06, 2010 at 03:57:53AM +0930, Will Robertson wrote:
> On 2010-06-06 02:54:13 +0930, Taco Hoekwater
> said:
>
> >Will Robertson wrote:
> >>On 2010-06-06 01:28:46 +0930, Eelis van der Weegen
> >> said:
> >>
> >>>If so, to what extent would this make XITS obsolete?
> >>
> >>Depends how g
On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 03:29:31PM -0300, George N. White III wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Will Robertson wrote:
>
> > On 2010-06-06 01:28:46 +0930, Eelis van der Weegen said:
> >
> >> On 2010-06-04 20:31, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> >>>
> >>> As promised, the OpenType MATH enriched versio
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 1:21 PM, Will Robertson wrote:
> On 2010-06-06 01:28:46 +0930, Eelis van der Weegen said:
>
>> On 2010-06-04 20:31, Khaled Hosny wrote:
>>>
>>> As promised, the OpenType MATH enriched version of STIX fonts, XITS,
>>> is now available.
>>
>> XITS looks very neat!
>>
>> Are
On 2010-06-06 02:54:13 +0930, Taco Hoekwater
said:
Will Robertson wrote:
On 2010-06-06 01:28:46 +0930, Eelis van der Weegen
said:
If so, to what extent would this make XITS obsolete?
Depends how good a job they do :)
And whether the current STIX release schedule is reliable. Judging
f
Will Robertson wrote:
On 2010-06-06 01:28:46 +0930, Eelis van der Weegen said:
On 2010-06-04 20:31, Khaled Hosny wrote:
As promised, the OpenType MATH enriched version of STIX fonts, XITS,
is now available.
XITS looks very neat!
Are the STIX people planning to release /official/ OpenType M
On 2010-06-06 01:28:46 +0930, Eelis van der Weegen
said:
On 2010-06-04 20:31, Khaled Hosny wrote:
As promised, the OpenType MATH enriched version of STIX fonts, XITS,
is now available.
XITS looks very neat!
Are the STIX people planning to release /official/ OpenType MATH
enriched versions
On 2010-06-04 20:31, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> As promised, the OpenType MATH enriched version of STIX fonts, XITS,
> is now available.
XITS looks very neat!
Are the STIX people planning to release /official/ OpenType MATH
enriched versions at some point as well (perhaps as part of STIX version
1.1 o
On Sat, Jun 05, 2010 at 01:58:10PM +0930, Will Robertson wrote:
> On 2010-06-05 11:40:28 +0930, wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu said:
>
> >On the other hand, with
> >
> >\setmathfont{XITS Math}
> >\setmainfont[Numbers=OldStyle,Mapping=tex-text]{STIXGeneral}
> >
> >I get improved STIX in Math, and the r
On 2010-06-05 14:58:22 +0930,
wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu said:
I read your answer to my post as an admission that STIXGeneral, which
covers actually all the usual 'text' blocks of the Unicode is not really
suitable for text? Is it really so? My naive perhaps perception was that
STIXGeneral was
> On 2010-06-05 11:40:28 +0930,
> wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu said:
>
>> On the other hand, with
>>
>> \setmathfont{XITS Math}
>> \setmainfont[Numbers=OldStyle,Mapping=tex-text]{STIXGeneral}
>>
>> I get improved STIX in Math, and the regular STIX in text with *no* Old
>> Style figures, plus unnecess
On 2010-06-05 11:40:28 +0930,
wodzi...@math.berkeley.edu said:
On the other hand, with
\setmathfont{XITS Math}
\setmainfont[Numbers=OldStyle,Mapping=tex-text]{STIXGeneral}
I get improved STIX in Math, and the regular STIX in text with *no* Old
Style figures, plus unnecesssary duplication of f
Thank you for the upload.
> This early version provides:
(...)
> * proper sub/superscript positioning (not fine tuned yet).
Yes, I can see that some superscripts/subscripts are positioned slightly
too close to the corresponding symbol (e.g. 'l' in $t^l$)
> * extensible radicals, delimiters
As promised, the OpenType MATH enriched version of STIX fonts, XITS,
is now available.
This early version provides:
* OpenType math constants values, necessary for proper layout of
various
math elements.
* proper math accent positioning.
* proper sub/superscript positioning (not fine tuned yet).
32 matches
Mail list logo
