Hi Will, Jonathan, and others
> On Feb 25, 2016, at 10:31 AM, Will Robertson <w...@wspr.io> wrote:
>
> On 24 Feb 2016, at 2:20 AM, Jonathan Kew <jfkth...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> For a document that wants some other kind of "ActualText", there's going to
>> need to be pretty detailed markup in the source, I think. (E.g. each word,
>> or similar unit, will need to be tagged to provide the desired ActualText
>> that goes with it.) At that point, I wonder if turning off
>> \XeTeXgenerateactualtext and just doing it "manually" with macros that
>> generate \special{}s would be the most reasonable way forward.
>
You have to be *very* careful with /ActualText, since it must be done using
PDFdoc encoding,
as it becomes part of the page contents stream.
Any errors will corrupt the PDF file completely — but that’s true of other
things as well.
Heiko’s \pdfstringdef in the hyperref package is very good for handling
this...
> This sounds interesting for maths, where there is a chance we could
> automatically insert \special{}s at the glyph and/or the equation level — has
> this always been possible in XeTeX or does this require the newest patch for
> xdvipdfmx you just released?
… but doing the math-characters correctly, without interfering with spacings,
is highly non-trivial.
Look at some of my papers associated with TUG conferences, to see various
options that can be used to make mathematics more accessible in PDFs; i.e.,
papers numbered as 5, 6, 7 on this page:
http://www.tug.org/twg/accessibility/
Although these were done using pdfTeX, some of these things should be able
to be implemented for XeTeX + xdvipdfmx also.
>
> Cheers,
> Will
Cheers,
Ross
--------------------------------------------------
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
