Am Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:20:21 +0100 schrieb jfbu:
> xetex: 5.25pt 2.625pt 1.75pt
There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around
here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html
It is unclear if it is engine bug and imho no one ever added
something to the issue track
Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around
> here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html
> It is unclear if it is engine bug and imho no one ever added
> something to the issue tracker.
Matthew concluded by writing :
It seems clear t
2017-01-25 11:07 GMT+01:00 Philip Taylor :
> Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> > There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around
> > here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html
> > It is unclear if it is engine bug and imho no one ever added
> > something to the issue trac
Am Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:07:34 + schrieb Philip Taylor:
> Whether the fault lies in the XeTeX engine or in the font is moot,
Well imho it is a difference if a font set this values and xetex
simply reads them in or if the font doesn't set this values and
xetex guesses (faulty) defaults.
Actua
For latex at least I think the thing to do is amend tulmtt.fd in base
so that it has
\DeclareFontFamily{TU}{lmtt}{%
\hyphenchar \font\m@ne
\fontdimen3\font\z@%<<
\fontdimen4\font\z@%<<
}
with the two extra lines ensuring that these two font dimens are set to 0.
(If you try this with a latex 2017
Ulrike Fischer wrote:
>
> Actually I found an old discussion which seems to imply that xetex
> calculates the fontdimens starting from the width a space -- and
> doesn't care about monospace or not:
>
> https://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2006-June/004236.html
But do we know whether the font in questi
Philip Taylor wrote:
>
> But do we know whether the font in question sets "isFixedPitch" true ?
>
To answer my own question : "yes" (assuming that "1" = "true") :
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.
Philip Taylor wrote:
> To answer my own question : "yes" (assuming that "1" = "true") :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
In which case I feel that it might safely be argued that there is a deficiency
in the XeTeX handling of Opentype monospaced fonts, un
On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around
> here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html
> It is unclear if it is engine bug and imho no one ever added
> something to the issue tracker.
That was a long, complicate
> Using XeTeX without fontspec is a relatively unusual case and it's
> unsurprising there hasn't been a lot of time spent on testing that. The
> engine and package go together.
It may become slightly less unusual after this week's latex release as now
latex defaults to TU (Unicode) encoding with
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
> Using XeTeX without fontspec is a relatively unusual case
I respectfully disagree. I use exclusively XeTeX and never fontspec. I am
certain that I am not alone in this.
Philip Taylor
--
Subscriptions, Archive, a
On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, Philip Taylor wrote:
> msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
> > Using XeTeX without fontspec is a relatively unusual case
> I respectfully disagree. I use exclusively XeTeX and never fontspec. I am
> certain that I am not alone in this.
That's why I said "relatively unusual" and
2017-01-25 15:17 GMT+01:00 :
> On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, Philip Taylor wrote:
> > msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
> > > Using XeTeX without fontspec is a relatively unusual case
> > I respectfully disagree. I use exclusively XeTeX and never fontspec. I
> am certain that I am not alone in this.
>
> Th
Le 25 janv. 2017 à 10:50, Ulrike Fischer a écrit :
>>
>
> There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around
> here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html
Hi,
[somewhat peripheral question]
in http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020099.html
(and als
Hi
Le 25 janv. 2017 à 11:13, Zdenek Wagner a écrit :
> It seems equally clear to me that the fault cannot lie in the fontspec
> package,
> since it can be demonstrated with a pure XeTeX example as Jean-François
> has shewn ... Whether the fault lies in the XeTeX engine or in the font is
> mo
On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, jfbu wrote:
> in http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020099.html
> (and also in one earlier post) in the thread pointed out by Ulrike,
> Matthew Skala commented on a WordSpace issue with fontspec.
>
> Has this issue been fixed since in fontspec ?
Three related issues
16 matches
Mail list logo
