Am Dienstag, den 21.02.2017, 10:35 -0500 schrieb Scott Kostyshak: > If you think your patch is a step forward, and these tests were just > passing by chance before, then in my opinion the correct way to > proceed > is to apply your patch and invert these two tests.
OK. Note that the two tests need not to be inverted. Since it is just a
"missing glyph" problem, we can include them in the chain that ignores
missing glyphs errors.
> Can you perhaps add
> some information on why you these two tests are expected to have
> problems with xunicode? We can add this information where we invert
> the
> tests. By adding comments in invertedTests file, we can easily see
> why
> certain tests are inverted.
They do not have problems with xunicode, but without. The reason is
that the asterisk glyph is not included in the arabic font
(Scheherazade), but apparently, xunicode defines an extra asterisk
glyph (for a different purpose) that is being used here. Clearly the
problem should be fixed somewhere else. A workaround is to redefine the
thanks command and to use \ast instead of the plain *:
\renewcommand*{\@fnsymbol}[1]{\ensuremath{\ifcase#1\or \ast\or
\dagger\or \ddagger\or\mathsection\or \mathparagraph\or \|\or
\ast\ast\or \dagger\dagger\or \ddagger\ddagger \else\@ctrerr\fi}}
Jürgen
>
> Scott
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
