Although I normally work with full-colour projects, the financial constraints
of a current project require me to avoid colour on any page on which it is not
strictly necessary (that is, to avoid colour on any page that does not carry a
coloured image or on which coloured text is essential). I f
I believe I've run into a bug in the interaction of fontspec and bidi in
the 2016 TeXLive distribution. However, it appears to be so simple to
trigger that I'm wondering whether it's something I'm doing.
The WME is:
\documentclass{report}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{bidi}
\
see the color package documentation
\color[cmyk]{0.1,0.2,0.3,0.4} hello
On 24 June 2016 at 21:50, Philip Taylor wrote:
> Although I normally work with full-colour projects, the financial constraints
> of a current project require me to avoid colour on any page on which it is
> not strictly nec
Hi,
if you want to use the colour feature of the OpenType fonts, only RGB
is supported. The color package allows you to use both CMYK and
grayscale (both are allowed in the printing industry). You can, of
course, set the colour by promitives. You have to use both k and K for
CMYK and both g and G
On my system Mike's minimal example gives the same results as he got
(periods to the left). Note that I use MiKTeX, not TeXLive.
David
On 6/24/2016 5:07 PM, maxwell wrote:
I believe I've run into a bug in the interaction of fontspec and bidi
in the 2016 TeXLive distribution. However, it appe
Can it be the problem of an increased number of ucharclasses? (I can
reproduce the problem.)
Zdeněk Wagner
http://ttsm.icpf.cas.cz/team/wagner.shtml
http://icebearsoft.euweb.cz
2016-06-24 23:49 GMT+02:00 David J. Perry :
> On my system Mike's minimal example gives the same results as he got
> (pe
* Skriv a reas maxwell (maxw...@umiacs.umd.edu):
|> I believe I've run into a bug in the interaction of fontspec and bidi in
|> the 2016 TeXLive distribution. However, it appears to be so simple to
|> trigger that I'm wondering whether it's something I'm doing.
|>
|> The WME is:
Yea! I asked the same thing today on German tex-d-l, after I encountered
the problem last night.
I thought I might have hit a wrong key kombination that calls bidi,
making the period active …
I've updated to TL '16 last week, it was the first run on that peticular
document after the update – e
On 6/24/2016 7:27 PM, Gildas Hamel wrote:
I ran into the same problem and noticed it in the numbering of
footnotes and lists. The solution for now, according to Ulrike
Fischer, is to add
\makeatletter\@Latintrue\makeatother to the polyglossia language
settings, because "bidi tests for \if@Latin,
