e)
config/
(*.config here)
Is it possible this is preventing FcInit (or fontconfig?) and XeTeX from
finding the .config files? How could I tell? (this would not however
explain why Word has the same problem)
Mike Maxwell
--
r/002650.html
See also
http://asymptote.sourceforge.net/doc/embed.html
I don't know whether the bridge has been gone under by enough water since
then to make this work...
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
method--like longest word matching--would do better
than the average human (who speaks and writes Lao :-)).
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
t might at least serve as a
starting point for a table for another font.
BTW, I don't like bleeding, so I haven't even tried this as yet...
Mike Maxwell
CASL/ U MD
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
itespace with no Bengali characters on the other side of
the whitepace) are a subset of the ones I want to tag for the font with the
script (sequences of Bengali characters, possibly including internal
whitespace). I think I know how to do it, it's just
uppose I'm not a good judge.)
But maybe that's not what Apostolos is talking about...
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Alts:SD-TTSurekh Normal
Copyright: ISFOC-SANSKRIT-DEVANAGARI-SUREKH-NORMAL. Copyright
(c) 1997-98, C-DAC, PUNE, INDIA.
-------
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
gt;>
>>> --
>>> Nicholas Riley
>>
>> Howdy,
>>
>> Looks like the font isn't being found.
>
> But the entire document is typeset in that font! After getting
xdvipdfmx
> to work, I'm still seeing this issue on 10.6 only, th
rogramming language. The current version is
written in WEB, which is a Pascal-based system + documentation; it is often
converted to C for compilation. And TeX itself doesn't look anything like
LISP to me, but maybe I'm missing s.t.? (Like a CAR and a CDR and...)
Can someone enlig
e
situation where the macro has split a long line. This seems to me at least
to make such interlinears easier to read. We've tested this for two-line
interlinears (that is, two aligned lines--not counting the free translation
or the Arabic script line); we&
ks hard-coded. I hope someone (John
Frampton?) will correct me if I'm mis-interpreting this.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
empty file exists, and look for similar
filenames, or a file with a suffix like .bkp or some such. Be sure to look
for hidden files. It's also possible there's something in /tmp, if this is
a *nix system.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Arch
atex or
in XeLaTeX itself?
Mike Maxwell
CASL/ U MD
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
I don't believe anything has been done on
either of these bug reports.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 16:16:13 -0500, maxwell
wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Feb 2011 15:13:03 +0100, Pander
> wrote:
>> For FreeMono I can get combining diacritic mark exactly over the
>> previous glyph but this does not work with FreeSerif, FreeMono DejaVu
>> Serif, DejaVu Sans and
tle discussion
about changing it to be UTF-8 aware, but it's not clear that ever got done.
So yes, I can see how that would be a problem! Similarly for BibTeX, I
guess; we're using it successfully with XeLaTeX, but probably only because
our use of Unicode in the citatio
ping over a ZWNJ? Or is the problem in the font? That wouldn't be
surprising, since as I say the virama is usually omitted in text written
for native speakers, so this problem seldom comes up. We're writing it in
our grammar for the edification of non-native speakers.
Mike Maxwell
On Wed, 16 Mar 2011 14:51:59 +1100, Andrew Cunningham
wrote:
> On 16 March 2011 08:16, maxwell wrote:
>
>>
>> With the Lohit and Bangla fonts in XeLaTeX, I get the same result: the
>> vowel sign E, which should hop over just the first consonant to its
left,
>> in
On Tue, 15 Mar 2011 17:16:39 -0400, maxwell
wrote:
> I have to admit that this was done with the TeXLive 2009 version of
xetex.
> I need to get the 2010 version installed...
I am now the proud runner of the 2010 version. (Don't laugh, it's only
2011!) And I can confirm that
On Mon, 4 Apr 2011 10:54:53 +0200, Susan Dittmar
wrote:
> Quoting Mike Maxwell (maxw...@umiacs.umd.edu):
>> Is there a way with xe(la)tex to display change bars (those vertical
>> lines in the margins marking text that's changed)?
>
> I do not know the answer to your
On Thu, 7 Apr 2011 11:40:38 -0700 (PDT), Apostolos Syropoulos
wrote:
> I don't think you need to modify xdvipdfmx but instead you need to
modify
> the package itself. I will try to modify the package but some time next
> week.
Wow, that would be great!
e
> point (U+0103) or as a combination of code points (LATIN SMALL LETTER A:
> U+0061 plus COMBINING BREVE: U+0306).
Can't (shouldn't!) you pass your texts through a Unicode normalization
process? Otherwise search on them might not work either, depending on how
sma
not aware of a general program (like
iconv) that does it. (I think there's a hack with iconv that allows it to
create decomposed forms, but that is not a bidirectional conversion.)
Maybe someone else on this list knows of tools that do that. (What OS are
you working on?)
Mike Maxwell
-
mmands. I guess \tracingonline=1 means to
output errors to stdout (or stderr?), but where is the effect of
\tracinglostchars described? In particular, what error msgs should I look
for if normalization fails or a font lacks a normalized character?
Mike Maxwell
---
ard and a 19"
> CRT monitor ?!
Floppies?
Myself, I'm still stuck in the Devonian. I have a slide rule. Electronic
calculators will be introduced in the Permian.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
have a chance to win, if I can just find my dissertation, which I
preserved on a 9-track tape:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9-track_tape
Produced on a CDC Cyber 170/750, with 60-bit words and 12-bit bytes; only
upper case letters, so lower case letters were encoded with an \E\S\C\A\P\E
\C\H\A\
igits, both of which are 1, you have to
carry into the next column; hence the name, You Carry It, since corrupted
to Eukaryote.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
find it. (And also fortunate to need xelatex just as it had matured.)
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
7;s a different issue.)
I agree that it would be nice to be able to reliably copy Unicode text
from the PDF, but (a) that issue isn't confined to program listings, and
(b) that would only solve the character ordering part of the problem.
Mike Maxwell
o that I was hoping
someone else had run into this (and come up with a work-around).
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
hat it's called (fc-list
doesn't seem to provide that info).
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On Wed, 15 Feb 2012 18:53:56 +0100, Peter Dyballa
wrote:
> Am 15.2.2012 um 18:29 schrieb maxwell:
>
>> (fc-list doesn't seem to provide that info)
>
> It does:
>
> fc-list : file family fullname lang | grep -i schehera
> /Library/Fonts/
gets wrapped (why is it wrapped in output
piped to a file?), the second line is still there--things like
undefined on input line 211
Is there no way to tell xetex to suppress warnings, while keeping true
error msgs?
Mike Maxwell
--
ce of an expected ligature encoding. Maybe someone else on this
list knows.
Mike Maxwell
University of Maryland
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
fine inside alltt.
Mike Maxwell
University of Maryland
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
thread:
http://www.tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-December/022463.html
is relevant.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
font files using the command line, as the
Windows Explorer view of the Fonts folder can "hide" things that
Windows believes to be deactivated, but which are in fact still
present.
I'll try that, otherwise this is a complete mysterification. It may be
a day or two before I can ge
ample by italics (see below),
things get weirder:
I haven't tried this on my Windows/Cygwin machine yet (I'm on another
machine now).
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
s like CharisSILR.ttf (or
something like that--I'm not on that computer now). So Windows happily
installed both versions of this font in C:\Windows\Fonts\, because the
two versions had different file names.
Mike Maxwell
--
Su
date)
Anyway, if the 0..3 part is any indication, xetex is now using
Harfbuzz, correct?
Mike Maxwell
The gentle giants of Harfang salute you.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On 2013-12-03 17:27, maxwell wrote:
Anyway, if the 0..3 part is any indication, xetex is now using
Harfbuzz, correct?
Aargh, just noticed that the version information already says this.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc
On 2013-12-09 11:15, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
A bit off topic, dou you know a good Linux text editor woth properly
implemented bidi algorithm so that I could type multilingual texts?
Yudit (http://www.yudit.org/) claims to be that. I have not used it.
Mike Maxwell
es have a GPOS table).
Regards,
Khaled
Afaict, this does not work under the TeXLive 2013 version, at least not
with this publisher's font. Am I missing s.t.?
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.
g the TeXLive 2013 version =
3.1415926-2.5-0..3-2013060708.)
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On 2014-06-17 11:31, maxwell wrote:
Late last year, I ran into a problem in which I could embed a PDF
v1.4, but not v1.5 (I have not tried this with newer versions of PDFs,
which are now up to 1.7). The problem and its work-around are
described here:
http://tug.org/mailman/htdig/xetex/2012
en we had the
problem.
Thanks to Bruno for this package, and for responding to my original msg.
Mike Maxwell
On 2013-02-09 14:34, Mike Maxwell wrote:
On 2/9/2013 6:29 AM, Bruno Le Floch wrote:
I'm the author of morewrites, which has to perform various hacks to go
around the hard lim
fill fill fill fill fill fill fill
fill fill fill fillfillfillfi.
} refer to second footnote.\footnote{Another footnote.}
\end{document}
--
Mike Maxwell
University of Maryland
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
e
other format? I suppose I could create a PDF using pdflatex, and import
that into my xetex file instead of the original jpg. But before I try
all these things, it would be nice to know if someone else has found a
work-around...
Mike Maxwell
---
Mike Maxwell (me) wrote:
I'm looking at one of our
jpgs in a text editor, and while I see the string "Exif" near the
top,
I don't see any jfif-like string.
Stefan Solbrig wrote:
You can find 'JFIF' of tombe.jpg at position 6, meaning, there are
six other bytes
g apparently should not have a StripOffsets tag.)
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
--"
brings up about six msgs from 2011, which seem to be the same thread,
and afaict are irrelevant.
We're running the version of xetex that came with TeXLive 2014
(3.14159265-2.6-0.1) on Linux.
Any suggestions as to what I should be
on my machine returns a v8.71,
and 'which ghostscript' returns v8.70); but at least we have s.t. to
look at.
But--how did you figure this out? I see no mention of
Ghostscript/Postscript in the error msg.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscript
graphic, but the other only has access to an .eps original?
I don't think so, but I'll certainly check when this other user gets
back (Wednesday).
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On 2014-08-27 18:49, maxwell wrote:
On 2014-08-27 18:16, Jonathan Kew wrote:
I'm curious why Ghostscript is being run at all. Is it trying to
convert a PostScript or EPS graphic, when you intended to use a PDF
directly? Maybe one of the users has a different version of the
graphics packag
creation tools default to non-embeddable
font licenses, and that some developers may not realize that (or not
realize the implications).
How do I find the exact license restrictions on a truetype font?
Mike Maxwell
University of Maryland
--
Sub
tin
glyphs
...
That's certainly the sort of thing I was looking for. How did you
extract that? (and from what file?)
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
le, when it's
ok with the Scheherazade? Is it looking at some other field? I don't
think it's reading the entire license agreement :-).
I'm listing after my sig line all the lines in xdvipdfmx's log file that
seem to have to do with the Nikosh font, i
ut then I don't see that field in the Scheherazade font
either, and xdvipdfmx treats that as embeddable.
So I'm not sure in FontForge how to get at the embeddability information
that xdvipdfmx (and Microsoft's font info plugin) is using.
Mike Maxwell
--
cense is encoded both as UTF-8 and as UTF-16; at a guess, the
latter is what Lorna reported in the Windows app (and what I also see in
FontForge) as looking like a "Chinese" license!
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
g restrictions? (The resulting
PDF does subset the font, which is probably not the correct result if
the "no subsetting" restriction in the font is taken at face value.)
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information
On 2014-09-22 22:04, Axel E. Retif wrote:
On 09/22/2014 08:42 PM, Mike Maxwell wrote:
I guess these jokers haven't heard of Unicode. Are they stuck back in
the 1990s?
Are you and Philip Taylor even aware that you're replying directly to
an arXiv administrator?
I think arXiv a
x@sortscheme
{nty}
Mike Maxwell
University of Maryland
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
es Fontspec do scaling? Do I get the same typographic results by
using Scale as I would if I simply specified a larger point size?
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
wild goose chase worrying
about whether Fontspec's scaling function will choose the appropriate
optical size...
Mike Maxwell
University of Maryland
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
ne with.
There's a way to prevent that; I _think_ it's to precede the combining
character by a non-breaking space (U+00A0). But I haven't tried that.
Mike Maxwell
University of Maryland
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List i
t's probably good enough,
at least for that use case.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
the caption
pkg to do ragged right only in one or the other of the places, loading
the bidi bpackage before or after the \captionsetup command (it cannot
be loaded before the caption pkg is loaded), etc.
Did anyone else notice this last year, and if so, has it been fixed in
the 201
On 10/20/2015 9:34 PM, Herbert Schulz wrote:
On Oct 20, 2015, at 7:55 PM, maxwell
wrote:
I've encountered a problem in the interaction between the
longtable, bidi, and caption packages.
>> ...
The longtable environment is like a tabular environment, not the same
as a floating envir
-to-R text of the caption, but
they seem to work ok).
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
page
documents looking for misplaced diacritics...
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On 2016-01-21 03:11, Stefan Solbrig wrote:
The documentation in the texlive installation contains a document
(xetex-reference.pdf) that describes this in detail. (locate the file
or type "texdoc xetex" if you have texlive installed.)
thanks, that's what I needed!
ary/2to3.html
I think the only thing it didn't completely fix in several large
programs we ran through it was the encoding conversion of
stdin/stdout/stderr. As I recall, it has something to do with Python
trying to detect the encoding in the s
5-2.6-0.2, from the
TeX Live 2015 distro) says it uses Graphite2 v1.2.3. Will the next TeX
Live distro's version of xetex use >= v.1.3.5?
--
Mike Maxwell
maxw...@umiacs.umd.edu
"I cannot believe that our existence in this universe
is a mere quirk of
I have restored Purnendu's original subject line, which got
changed to "XeTeX Digest..." in the last reply.
--
Mike Maxwell
maxw...@umiacs.umd.edu
"I cannot believe that our existence in this universe
is a mere quirk of fate, an accident of history, an
r things, with no effect.
What do I yet lack?
Mike Maxwell
University of Maryland
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
g the xdvipdfmx back
end would help (hence the option), but apparently not.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
ountered a problem.
But surely there are lots of people out there happily using xelatex and
hyperref without any problem, right? Why is this only showing up now?
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.o
No idea, can you send me the full log off list and I'll see if I can
debug
Will do, thanks!
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
from 2015 to 2016? We did a pretty vanilla
install, I think the only non-default choice we made was to use
'letter' instead of 'a4'.
3) Is this a bug? (meaning should I report it?)
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archi
n).
Thanks for the help!
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
ng useful. There are plenty of hits with "does
not contain script", but not afaict any that tell me how to determine
what scripts a font supports.
It may of course be possible that this font supports the Bengali script,
but doe
On 2016-06-20 16:20, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
otfinfo --scripts font-file.otf
Thanks, that's what I needed. For some reason otfinfo doesn't show up
with 'apropos' on my machine...
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive,
gari is a script, not a language.
(And elsewhere I'm successfully using Script= with the name of a script,
e.g 'Script=Thaana', where Thaana is the name of a script, Dhivehi is
the name of the language that uses the Thaana script.)
Is this font using a non-standard way o
o
\newfontfamily\sanskritfont[Script=Devanagari]{gargi}
and similarly for the Nikosh font, fontspec gives a warning when I do
\newfontfamily\bengalifont[Script=Bengali]{Nikosh}
unless I change
\newfontscript{Bengali}{bng2,beng}
to
\newfontscript{Bengali}{beng}
in fontspec-xetex.sty.
Thanks
reversal, too :-).)
Loading fontspec seems to be necessary for this bug to happen. And I'm
not actually invoking either bidi or fontspec.
Can someone reproduce this?
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc
is does, my tex creds are not good):
\usepackage{bidi}
\csname @Latintrue\endcsname
--
Mike Maxwell
maxw...@umiacs.umd.edu
"I cannot believe that our existence in this universe
is a mere quirk of fate, an accident of history, an
incidental blip
into this problem with the DejaVu fonts and Acrobat?
I can make a MWE if that would help; I'm just hoping someone else has
already run into this problem and has a work-around :-).
Mike Maxwell
University of Washington
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On 2016-07-22 13:29, maxwell wrote:
The new version of Adobe Acrobat (which I have the misfortune to be
using at my office) is outputting a warning where we didn't used to
get a warning. Namely, it complains about one particular font in our
PDFs. The warning is:
Cannot extract the emb
On 2016-07-22 14:55, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
2016-07-22 20:05 GMT+02:00 maxwell :
On 2016-07-22 13:29, maxwell wrote:
...
Moral of the story: upgrade fonts before complaining.
I had an opposite experience a few years ago. It was necessary to
downgrade the DejaVu fonts in order to make them work
which exists in both proportionally and mono-spaced versions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fira_Sans
I'm not sure what its code point coverage is, nor whether it handles
stacked diacritics; we'll see.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Arch
izes OTF
fonts over TTF fonts fc-list finds two such fonts.
--
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
hough I suppose that might need to be done at
the level of /etc/fonts/local.conf.) Thank you though!
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
s, is there any legitimate reason xelatex and xdvipdfmx
should want a .woff file?
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
d), and the
problem seems to have gone away.
Thank you, Philip, for bringing the above post to my attention!
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
t) it?
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
to the
correct one).
Any suggestions on where we should look? Either in the font, or in
xetex itself. (There's obviously an issue with the new version of the
font, since earlier versions worked; but given that their copy of xetex
works on this latest font and mine doesn't, it's
75). It's not clear to me
whether this can get into xetex before the next TeXLive release, given
the schedule here:
https://www.tug.org/texlive/
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/m
other developers of that font, although I suppose
Martin is the expert on this issue.
I can also take this off-line if that would be more appropriate.
Mike Maxwell
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/lis
portability and consistency. The other
side of this, of course, is that they don't automatically benefit from
library updates.
Which brings me back to my original question: will xetex as distributed
in TeXLive 2017 include this harfbuzz update? Or is it too late for
that?
Mike Ma
1 - 100 of 191 matches
Mail list logo
