On 2010-05-31 01:31:40 +0930, Michael Lynch
<michael.s.ly...@googlemail.com> said:
If you were to use the STIX fonts in the meantime, given the lack of
OpenType features in the STIX release, does it make more sense to use
mathspec instead of unicode-math? I was under the impression that
unicode-math was exclusively designed for working with “proper”
OpenType math fonts.
mathspec does a great job mapping text alphabet fonts into math
alphabet fonts, but it wasn't designed to be a general solution for
assigning control sequences or behaviour for the full repertoire of
unicode math symbols (i.e., the non-alphabetic ones).
I haven't really done enough testing to see how far you get with the
STIX fonts without OpenType features, but you can at the very least
*access* all the glyphs. But things like delimiter scaling and big
operator sizes and square roots won't work; they require a "real"
OpenType maths font. I probably won't spend too much time trying to
fake them, however; in the meantime we can use XITS-Math and the other
real OpenType maths fonts for the parts we need them for.
W
--------------------------------------------------
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
