>How is the [body] feature defined?

\definefontfeature[body][default][onum=yes,pnum=yes,calt=yes,protrusion=quality,expansion=quality]

\definefontfeature[in][body][sinf=yes]%inferior
\definefontfeature[su][body][sups=yes,ordn=yes]%superior
\definefontfeature[nu][body][numr=yes]%numerator
\definefontfeature[de][body][dnom=yes]%denominator
in{\addff{in}123}
su{\addff{su}123abc}
nu{\addff{nu}123}
de{\addff{de}123}

The numerals all come out as proportional oldstyle, but the letters work.  So,
sinf, sups, numr, and dnom are failing but ordn works.

I was thinking---besides updating to 0.60 yesterday, I was also trying
to test Stix fonts, so I ran:
mtxrun --script fonts --reload
luatools --generate
Maybe a change in mtxrun or luatools broke these features?


About my other problem---the strange one that's hard to isolate, and
which appeared this way in 0.50:

! LuaTeX error ...imal/tex/texmf-context/tex/context/base/lpdf-ini.lua:345:
pdf.immediateobj() object in use

and this way in 0.60:

" ! Undefined control sequence.
<argument> \@@bklocation
\processaction ...-> \expandaction \!!stringa{#1
             } \ifx \!!stringa \empty \l..."

I'm still having a very hard time isolating a short example---e.g., I
spent the evening discovering this:  near the end of about seven pages
of typeset text, I have the following string in my input file:

"become more obvious as we examine the phenomena"

This works:
become more obvious as %we examine the phenomena
and this fails:
become more obvious as we %examine the phenomena

I know the word "we" isn't the problem.  Maybe it has something to do
with the length of the text, but that doesn't seem quite right either.
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 
Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net
archive  : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________

Reply via email to