(Could be memoir offers more.)
Indeed it does offer many more font size options. My personal
recommendation is to start learning memoir (it's a big, complicated thing)
if you often need to produce documents with a complex layout. The common
LaTeX classes are pretty useless for that sort o
Jonathan,
This is great news--thank you! There is also an OpenType feature called
Optical Bounds that is designed to do exactly this. My understanding is
that very few, if any, page layout programs support this feature. Maybe
XeTeX should be cutting-edge in this regard also? FontForge does
The proper solution would be to use /ActualText feature of the PDF
specification.
I am very interested in this issue of searching PDFs. A google search for
"PDF Actual Text" turned up nothing. I then downloaded the actual PDF spec
from the Adobe web site and found the reference, and got the
My understanding is that the only way to make PDFs 100% searchable is to use
fonts that avoid the PUA altogether. In other words, the 'Th' ligature
would be accessible only via an OT or AAT feature such as discretionary
ligatures; the user could not put it into a document by entering a PUA valu
Scripsit Gareth:
What is more, I do a lot of work with Syriac, a cursive script for which
most joined shapes are encoded in the PUA or somewhere that's going
spare. This means that my XeTeX PDFs aren't searchable or copyable in
Syriac. Only one or two Syriac letters per word can be searched or c
Gareth,
Everything that Khaled said in his message is correct, particularly about
PDFs relying on glyph names and about not using the Unicode presentation
forms. My comments about ligatures not having PUA assignments were written
under the assumption that they were all correctly named (e.g.,
Alexander,
Are you including the xunicode package, which translates the traditional TeX
keystrokes into their Unicode equivalents? The following minimal example
works for me (Windows, MiKTeX 2.7) with marks correctly placed. I happen to
have the Unicode values for the diacritics memorized, s
Add to my previous reply (sorry, forgot):
Your keystrokes
\d{\={a}}
\={\d{a}}
also work correctly in my little sample file. I was concerned first to make
sure that Junicode would handle the accents correctly (I thought it would)
so I typed in the characters the fastest way for me. But most
Alexander,
If there is no pre-composed glyph xelatex _never_ assembles the glyph
correctly.
This is just not true. The example I sent you works correctly on my
machine; I deliberately included y-macron-acute which does not exist in
precomposed form in Unicode.
I need to run to work right
Furtive patah will work in Cardo. Just type the patah after the consonant
and it will be moved to the right automatically. Nothing else is required.
I set things up this way to make it as easy as possible for users, without
assuming that any OT features such as contextual alternates would be
Another question: do beginners need an editor with LaTeX support? I don't
think
it is wise to recommend a "large", complex editor like TeXnicCenter or Vim
to
newcomers. Most good programming books take care not to overwhelm newbies
with
complicated editors or IDEs.
Maybe it would be easiest t
- Original Message -
From: "Michiel Kamermans"
TeXWork should be recommended. But I wouldn't recommend it as main TeX
editor on windows just yet, because it refuses to behave like every other
application I use on it. That makes it a "good alternative if the
following editors aren't
Windoof user have to be hardened by ugly UI.
What about "losedos"?
I am (mostly) a Windows user but am neither stupid nor a loser. All OSs
have their imperfections, people have different reasons for what they use,
so let's stay on task here without insults.
David
--
Alan Munn wrote:
Why should the average person need to learn to program a computer? It's
like asking why they should learn to repair their fridge. But of course
when a student bumps up against TeX, they are confronted with many things
which are truly out of their actual experience with
Mike Maxwell wrote:
Maybe: books which need to be nicely typeset (probably not your average
paperback), pamphlets, some kinds of technical articles (particularly
math), multilingual documents where at least one of the languages uses a
complex script, dictionaries.
All of the above: also, anyone
Ross and Will,
So the first question should be what is the version of XeTeX that MikTeX
is providing.
And is David actually using that, or still an earlier version, as I was on
a Mac.
If the primitive is not there, then the latest versions of expl3 and
fontspec just will not work, and may not
Hi Will,
See the attached. This is a version of a file that I had on my machine
upstate (I kept the preamble, just removed the actual text). This file
would not compile last weekend, giving me the same errors that I encountered
while working on my big book project.
It compiles on my machin
The largest standard font size in LaTeX is \Huge; only the memoir class,
AFAIK, recognizes \HUGE.
David
- Original Message -
From: "houda araj"
To: "arabic-latex"
Sent: Tuesday, October 26, 2010 7:27 PM
Subject: [XeTeX] huge front of non latin
Hello,
When I put HUGE in front of
Hi Vadim,
This all depends on the font. Most font makers have not planned to support
such combinations; Junicode is one that I know of with good support for
almost any sequence you might need, and also Charis SIL. They both work on
my system in your test file.
The font maker must put in a
- Original Message -
This font has precomposed "Latin small letter a with macron and acute"
( \char"0F01 resp. \XeTeXglyph3066 ).
The makers of this font have placed their a-macron-acute at a codepoint
assigned to another character in Unicode; very, very bad practice. One can
always
In addition to the fonts Herb suggested, Junicode, Gentium, Charis SIL and
Times New Roman (the latter being the version supplied with my Windows Vista
system) have all these characters. They are all precomposed combinations
that are defined in Unicode, so it's not surprising that many fonts wi
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Dyballa"
To: "Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms"
Sent: Wednesday, January 19, 2011 4:14 PM
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] problem with small caps
Am 19.01.2011 um 21:13 schrieb Khaled Hosny:
I thought the font without 'O' was an OpenType
It's a font issue. Unless a font maker specifically sets up each combining
mark to fit correctly over all the possible base characters through the
OpenType mark to base feature, they won't work right. A partial exception
might be a monospaced font; since all the characters are the same width,
Remember that Mac and Windows/Linux use two completely different
technologies to display complex scripts: OS X uses Apple's own AAT fonts,
while the other two major platforms use OpenType. I've noticed some
confusion, even among people on this list, about this issue. If you are
comparing font
I had the exact same problem last weekend. I constructed an OT feature to
replace a long s with a regular s if followed by a comma, period, space,
etc. The longs-space combination did not work. I am not a low-level TeX
programming kind of guy, but I had learned a bit somewhere about TeX's
"g
Will,
Thanks for the reply. Having spent the larger part of Sunday testing on
some additional machines, I can report the following. All tests were
conducted using the same exact font file (a PS-flavor OTF). MiKTeX is kept
updated. If anybody has an idea about why the font works in XeLaTeX
x27;t
know about that and it should enable me to figure this out.
David
- Original Message -
From: "Ulrike Fischer"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, February 15, 2011 4:30 AM
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] Proper way to set up OT Features
Am Mon, 14 Feb 2011 22:49:00 -0500 schrieb David J. Perry:
- Original Message -
From: "Meho R."
To: "Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms"
Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 9:27 AM
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] Accessing ligatures from FontForge
Thanks for the link. However, even Adobe's OTF fonts have same problems
when used with XeL
John,
When you created the f_f_l and so forth in FontForge, did mark them as
ligatures and indicate the correct number of components? (Characters in OT
are classified as simple, ligatures, marks, components and something else I
forget at the moment; ligatures also receive a value of 2, 3, etc
Sounds like a font problem. I don't know Bangla, but any properly designed
font should render correctly any combinations of characters that ordinarily
appear in the language(s) it is designed to support. Implementing such
complex substitutions as you describe is difficult for font developers,
Ross,
It looks like you may have multiple versions of Libertine. The list of
fonts at the left of your screen shot shows Linux Libertine O, which is the
opentype version (fonts endings in .otf), while the main portion shows .ttf
fonts, which are named Linux Libertine (no 'O'). I had the same
Phil,
MiKTeX, available for Windows users, does exactly what you describe (if you
give it permission to download missing packages automatically; you can turn
that off if desired). That's the main reason I use it in preference to
TeXLive. I realize it's not helpful for non-Windows folks, but
Last time I checked (which was a little while back) winedt did not support
Unicode well. Since Xe(La)TeX and associated programs such as fontspec are
designed to work in Unicode, you might want to try a different editor; I
suggest TeXworks, which comes with MiKTeX.
David
- Original Messa
Does Linux "fake" bold and italic characters, if a font does not come with
true bold and italic versions? Windows does this; if Linux does also, it's
possible that the font you are using comes only in roman, and the bold you
see in LibreOffice is not real. Just a possibility --
David
-
Hi François,
Rather than looking for an editor, I would simply add Sanskrit as a language
in the Windows system and locate a good Unicode font that supports the
characters needed for Sanskrit. That way your friend could use any
Unicode-aware text editor, of which there are many; if a TeX-orie
I am developing a font to support the Old Italic block of Unicode and
want to test it in XeTeX. The languages that are unified in the Old
Italic range have recently been given OT tags, but I don't think XeTeX
knows about them yet. The fontspec docs say (p. 35) that you can
declare a new langu
Thank you, Arthur! Everything works now. Last night I was banging my
head up against this and I knew I was making it harder than it was. I
really appreciate the flexibility that XeTeX offers in defining new
languages and in providing access to all OT features contained in a
font. It's a tre
I don't have an exact answer, but something similar recently happened to
me. I have a PDF with a bunch of Old Italic characters. It displays
correctly on screen regardless of what computer I use. If I print from
my laptop downstairs to the Brother network printer in my study
upstairs, the O
I know nothing whatsoever about math, so perhaps I shouldn't even join
this discussion, but I am curious. I do have considerable experience in
font development and supporting things like the use of combining marks
and variation selectors outside of math contexts.
I looked in a font editor at
Thanks for the reply, Will.
On 2/10/2016 4:52 PM, Will Robertson wrote:
My understanding here is that Variant Selector acts like a character
to produce a difference glyph (analogous to a ligature), so doesn’t
need shaping/positioning information.
That's true, but the fonts that I am familiar w
On 2/10/2016 5:34 PM, David Carlisle wrote:
Note I was using Khaled's xits-math variant not the original stix
version, xits-math has many improvements to the opentype internals.
The VS1 combinations in xits-math work for example in firefox. David
Thanks, David. I downloaded the XITS fonts today
I am working with a group of scholars to implement the Old Italic block
of Unicode. For this purpose I have created a font to support the
Faliscan language. But I am getting unexpected behavior with the
stylistic sets.
The minimal example pasted at the end of this email gives the result
sho
Simon kindly tested my font in the SILE editor. The script and language
settings and the stylistic set all work as expected there. So it seems
the font is not the source of the problems I'm experiencing. Any
additional insights are appreciated!
David
---
Does XeTeX provide any way to access this feature? I have looked
through the Fontspec manual, with particular attention to §10.7ff, but
found nothing.
The designer of the font I am testing put some substitutions under this
feature. I'm not sure why, since he could just as well have used a
s
Thank you, Will. It works fine to add the feature as you
suggested. I don't think there is any need for this to be added to
XeTeX, particularly since it can be turned on if one really needs it.
The font I'm testing is a little strange, as I said, so there's no case
for making changes becaus
MikTeX will update to XeTeX 0.6 next month; not sure if that version
includes support for the latest Graphite, but if it does then it's one
way for Windows users to get it. See
http://www.miktex.org/announcement/miktex-next-5900 .
On 4/19/2016 6:21 PM, Lorna Evans wrote:
I was thinking I
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
The OpenType spec says that when a layout engine encounters a situation
where mirrored glyphs are required, it should automatically apply the
or features (assuming they exist in the font). LibreOffice
and TextEdit / Nisus Writer (latter Mac only) do this. See the "Simple
RLO Test" screen shot
Unless you have the mindset of a programmer and enjoy writing everything
from scratch, I would go with XeLaTeX rather than plain XeTeX.
William's advice about gradually locating packages that will help you is
good. I have used the memoir class to typeset a fairly complex book
(side margins, m
49 matches
Mail list logo
