Hi Khaled, Jiang,
I found that r34804 of dvipdfmx could not create a pdf
for a simple vertical text by using SourceHanSansJP,
while r34711 of dvipdfmx could create a fine pdf for the
same text.
I attach a file dvipdfmx-test.tar.gz which contains
(1) UniSourceHanSansJP-UTF16-H
(2) UniSourceHanSan
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Akira Kakuto wrote:
> Hi Khaled, Jiang,
>
> I found that r34804 of dvipdfmx could not create a pdf
> for a simple vertical text by using SourceHanSansJP,
> while r34711 of dvipdfmx could create a fine pdf for the
> same text.
>
> I attach a file dvipdfmx-test.tar.g
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Jiang Jiang wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Akira Kakuto wrote:
>> Hi Khaled, Jiang,
>>
>> I found that r34804 of dvipdfmx could not create a pdf
>> for a simple vertical text by using SourceHanSansJP,
>> while r34711 of dvipdfmx could create a fine pdf
Hi,
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Jiang Jiang wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Jiang Jiang wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Akira Kakuto
>> wrote:
>>> Hi Khaled, Jiang,
>>>
>>> I found that r34804 of dvipdfmx could not create a pdf
>>> for a simple vertical text by using
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Jiang Jiang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Jiang Jiang wrote:
>> On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:28 AM, Jiang Jiang wrote:
>>> On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 11:26 AM, Akira Kakuto
>>> wrote:
Hi Khaled, Jiang,
I found that r34804 of dvipdfmx
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:10 PM, Jiang Jiang wrote:
> Possible fix: https://gist.github.com/jjgod/88bb45f2cc7711bf3fd0
I have committed a better fix as r34805. It still doesn't fix the
original warnings with ToUnicode map, which I will look into later.
But at least it doesn't regress.
- Jiang
Hi Jiang,
I have committed a better fix as r34805.
Thanks a lot, Jiang. It works fine for the example.
Thanks,
Akira
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 3:59 PM, Akira Kakuto wrote:
> Hi Jiang,
>
>
>> I have committed a better fix as r34805.
>
>
> Thanks a lot, Jiang. It works fine for the example.
Anyone feel like trying out the following patches?
https://gist.github.com/jjgod/0d4b6339d761a5423f82
Patch 1 will fix the T
On Aug 3, 2014, at 6:27 PM, Gildas Hamel wrote:
> % !TEX TS-program = xelatexmk
> % !TEX encoding = UTF-8 Unicode
>
> \documentclass[12pt]{article}
> \usepackage{fontspec}
> \usepackage{lipsum}
> \usepackage{graphicx}
>
> \begin{document}
> \lipsum
> \begin{figure}[h]
> \includegraphics[sc
Hi Jiang,
Anyone feel like trying out the following patches?
https://gist.github.com/jjgod/0d4b6339d761a5423f82
Patch 1 will fix the ToUnicode generation for all non-subst glyphs in
a non-XeTeX generated dvi. In our case, non-subst glyphs are the
glyphs that are *NOT* changed by applying OpenT
On 4 Aug 2014, at 00:48, Herbert Schulz wrote:
>
> On Aug 3, 2014, at 6:27 PM, Gildas Hamel wrote:
>
>> % !TEX TS-program = xelatexmk
>> % !TEX encoding = UTF-8 Unicode
>>
>> \documentclass[12pt]{article}
>> \usepackage{fontspec}
>> \usepackage{lipsum}
>> \usepackage{graphicx}
>>
>> \begin{
Hi Jiang ,
I have committed a better fix as r34805.
Thanks a lot, Jiang. It works fine for the example.
However, unfortunately, invalid toUnicode problem for non-CJK fonts,
fixed by Khaled, has reappeared. I attach a sample.tex.
Thanks,
Akira
sample.tex
Description: Binary data
---
On Aug 3, 2014, at 17:48, Elliott Roper wrote:
>
>
> On 4 Aug 2014, at 00:48, Herbert Schulz wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 3, 2014, at 6:27 PM, Gildas Hamel wrote:
>>
>>> % !TEX TS-program = xelatexmk
>>> % !TEX encoding = UTF-8 Unicode
>>>
>>> \documentclass[12pt]{article}
>>> \usepackage{fontspe
On Aug 3, 2014, at 17:48, Elliott Roper wrote:
>
>
> On 4 Aug 2014, at 00:48, Herbert Schulz wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 3, 2014, at 6:27 PM, Gildas Hamel wrote:
>>
>>> % !TEX TS-program = xelatexmk
>>> % !TEX encoding = UTF-8 Unicode
>>>
>>> \documentclass[12pt]{article}
>>> \usepackage{fontspe
On 04.08.2014 01:27, Gildas Hamel wrote:
> I append the jpg file (tombe.jpg).
The resolution data in tombe.jpg are inconsistent:
* JFIF header: 72 DPI
* EXIF header: 300 DPI
Apparently XeTeX uses the EXIF header, whereas xdvipdfmx the JFIF header
(or vice versa).
It would be nice, if the TeX pr
On Mon, Aug 4, 2014 at 4:45 AM, Akira Kakuto wrote:
> Hi Jiang ,
>
>
>>> I have committed a better fix as r34805.
>>
>>
>> Thanks a lot, Jiang. It works fine for the example.
>
>
> However, unfortunately, invalid toUnicode problem for non-CJK fonts,
> fixed by Khaled, has reappeared. I attach a s
16 matches
Mail list logo