Hi Ross,
Though, this leads me to the additional note, that in math mode---which
is typically set in italics---, the use of \mathbf{x} does not produce
a bold italic variant but rather only a bold upright variant of x in
this case.
This is the way it has always been in LaTeX.
It should not be changed, else this will affect millions of existing
documents.
I wasn't aware about this issue. In normal text mode, italic and bold font
selections work complementary... so I expected the same behavior in math
mode too. I can't really understand these differing approaches.
If I use the \pmb{x} or \bm{x} commands instead for instance, XeLaTeX
produces a bold italic looking variant of the letter x. In closer
inspection, however, the bold italic x is nothing else than a normal
italic x superimposed on another one with a slight offset...
Yes. This is a hack to compensate for lack of math fonts.
This kind of thing should no longer be necessary with proper OTF math
fonts, but you need new macros to refer to the desired characters.
This is what Unicode-math and math spec are for. They completely rewrite
how LaTeX handles mathematics with such fonts. It is a massive job, not
yet completed.
I already had a look at the Unicode-math package, but as I understood is
it used instead of Mathspec, which however would provide better
customization I think.
Is there a way to use the regular \mathbf{...} command to have bold
italic math?
Isn't there a command \mathbfit or similar spelling?
Thanks a lot for this hint. Even after "googling" for bold fonts in math
before I haven't come across this command. I tried it out and it totally
works! :)
But better is to define a macro for the concepts that require use of
such bold symbols;
E.g. \newcommand{\xx}{\mathbfit{x}}and use these within the body of
your document.
Yeah, I might do that.
Hope this helps,
Ross
Absolutely.
Thanks a lot for the help.
Pinfeng
--------------------------------------------------
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
