Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 27.09.2010 um 01:16 schrieb Mojca Miklavec:
> Abstract: lshort needs a chapter/section about Unicode on its own.
>> From what I experience here, a lot of TeX users are so brain-washed to
> use \v{c} and alike
Well: this is the official way to enter the character č, as described in
lshort.pdf, p. 24.
In the nineties when I started writing a few puny HTML documents, I learned
that I had to type ä to get ä. It never came to me that this was silly:
why should I type a six-character string instead of a character that I could
enter with a single keystroke? It was just a technical requirement. Most users
still think like that: they have learned that “special characters” cause
problems and should thus be avoided. Even the wording is problematic: why are
ä, č, π, ≤, 儹 and ص special, but A, ` and # not? Unicode should have liberated
us from such thinking.
> UTF-8 can/should just as well be
> used in pdfLaTeX.
Again lshort.pdf disagrees (see p. 26): you are supposed to use Mac Roman for
Mac, Latin-1 for Unix (what is that? can’t be Linux since that is not Unix, do
they mean OS X which is Unix? but what about Mac Roman, then?), Windows-1252
for Windows and CP-850 for DOS and OS/2 (of course highly relevant in 2010).
There are also suggestions for Cyrillic documents (apparently Western European
Latin and Cyrillic are the only scripts in the world). If you want more,
lshort.pdf encourages you to use the unmaintained ucs package instead of the
maintained utf8enc.def.
What I want to say: before one should think about including XeTeX in lshort
(and further redefine the meaning of the word “short”), one should perhaps
thoroughly clean up the existing document. Probably it could be made much more
concise by throwing out the legacy baggage.
> Second: I'm not sure if a special section is needed
> to mention all the zillions of methods to enter Unicode characters,
> though that could be covered in a separate document.
>
> On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 22:08, Tobias Schoel wrote:
>>
>> Agreed. But one should at least give a reference link to information about
>> how to input Unicode in Windoof, OS X and Linux respectively. There is no
>> advantage in telling the people in lshort: "There is also XeLaTeX, which
>> lets you input everything in unicode and use any OpenType or TrueType font
>> on your system.", if you don't tell them how to do this or at least where to
>> find information about it. These people will simply say: "What the heck is
>> Unicode again? I simply press the keys on my keyboard."
>>
>> The "usual" Windows user has no to hardly any knowledge of input methods
>> other than what he is used to. Consequently he won't see any advantage of
>> _being allowed to_ enter any unicode character, if he isn't _able to_.
>
> Wait. Unicode is not only about US users who need to typeset an accent
> every now and then, but also about users who know how to use their
> local keyboard, but keep using cp-1250, cp-1252, ...
>
> Maybe I'm wrong, but (talking about a couple of years ago) I found it
> much more difficult to actually *save* the file in proper encoding
> (with editors defaulting to some random local encoding) than to
> properly enter the character that I needed for whatever reason.
>
> Our keyboard on windows is capable of producing most accented latin
> letters, but I don't think that anyone would want to explain how to
> use every single keyboard in that short section.
>
> There are two kinds of non-ascii character usage: writing in native
> language and writing foreign names. The second is a bit exceptional
> and can often be dealt with copy-paste\footnote{I maintain the package
> with hyphenation patterns that needs a lot of different Unicode
> characters for various reasons and I have created my own keyboard
> layout, but I don't have the slightest idea how to input any accented
> character apart from those used in my language + German; neither in my
> OS nor in my text editor; copy-paste fully serves the purpose; on
> windows we had a labeled keyboard with dead keys, but now I do survive
> without}. Those who need to type characters from local alphabet
> usually know how to do that. After all, they need to use other
> applications and their keyboard is usually configured properly.
>
> But all these users don't necessary know anything about file encodings
> (and why should they?). They just use whatever encoding works for
> them. I kept using 8bit encoding for a long time after I already knew
> that UTF-8 was a better choice just because editors had enormous
> problems with Unicode.
>
> My favorite TeX editor (WinEDT) didn't support Unicode at all some
> years ago, even (g)VIM *still* nowadays simply defaults to cp-1250 and
> it is pretty non-straightforward for a new user to convince it to use
> UTF-8. My teacher who uses Mac opened a document in UTF-8, edited a
> whole bunch of stuff and stored it under MacRoman encoding,
> irreversibly (even though Macs are well known for their
> "Unic
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Abstract: lshort needs a chapter/section about Unicode on its own.
>From what I experience here, a lot of TeX users are so brain-washed to
use \v{c} and alike that they don't even realize that it is also
possible to use Unicode (or other 8-bit encodings for that matter).
First: this is unrelated to XeTeX; UTF-8 can/should just as well be
used in pdfLaTeX. Second: I'm not sure if a special section is needed
to mention all the zillions of methods to enter Unicode characters,
though that could be covered in a separate document.
On Sun, Sep 26, 2010 at 22:08, Tobias Schoel wrote:
>
> Agreed. But one should at least give a reference link to information about
> how to input Unicode in Windoof, OS X and Linux respectively. There is no
> advantage in telling the people in lshort: "There is also XeLaTeX, which
> lets you input everything in unicode and use any OpenType or TrueType font
> on your system.", if you don't tell them how to do this or at least where to
> find information about it. These people will simply say: "What the heck is
> Unicode again? I simply press the keys on my keyboard."
>
> The "usual" Windows user has no to hardly any knowledge of input methods
> other than what he is used to. Consequently he won't see any advantage of
> _being allowed to_ enter any unicode character, if he isn't _able to_.
Wait. Unicode is not only about US users who need to typeset an accent
every now and then, but also about users who know how to use their
local keyboard, but keep using cp-1250, cp-1252, ...
Maybe I'm wrong, but (talking about a couple of years ago) I found it
much more difficult to actually *save* the file in proper encoding
(with editors defaulting to some random local encoding) than to
properly enter the character that I needed for whatever reason.
Our keyboard on windows is capable of producing most accented latin
letters, but I don't think that anyone would want to explain how to
use every single keyboard in that short section.
There are two kinds of non-ascii character usage: writing in native
language and writing foreign names. The second is a bit exceptional
and can often be dealt with copy-paste\footnote{I maintain the package
with hyphenation patterns that needs a lot of different Unicode
characters for various reasons and I have created my own keyboard
layout, but I don't have the slightest idea how to input any accented
character apart from those used in my language + German; neither in my
OS nor in my text editor; copy-paste fully serves the purpose; on
windows we had a labeled keyboard with dead keys, but now I do survive
without}. Those who need to type characters from local alphabet
usually know how to do that. After all, they need to use other
applications and their keyboard is usually configured properly.
But all these users don't necessary know anything about file encodings
(and why should they?). They just use whatever encoding works for
them. I kept using 8bit encoding for a long time after I already knew
that UTF-8 was a better choice just because editors had enormous
problems with Unicode.
My favorite TeX editor (WinEDT) didn't support Unicode at all some
years ago, even (g)VIM *still* nowadays simply defaults to cp-1250 and
it is pretty non-straightforward for a new user to convince it to use
UTF-8. My teacher who uses Mac opened a document in UTF-8, edited a
whole bunch of stuff and stored it under MacRoman encoding,
irreversibly (even though Macs are well known for their
"Unicode"-awareness and TeXShop is considered to be a solid editor,
but well ... the defaults are still 8bit).
Mojca
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] build-problems on OpenSUSE 11.2
Hi, build-xetex.sh in trunk breaks on OpenSUSE 11.2 on amd64: g++ -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I. -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/texk/web2c -I./.. -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/texk -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/texk -DNO_DEBUG -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/texk/web2c/.. -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/texk/web2c/xetexdir -DU_STATIC_IMPLEMENTATION -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include `cat /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/freetype2/ft-includes` -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/teckit/include -DXETEX_OTHER -DPDF_PARSER_ONLY -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/xpdf -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/xpdf/goo -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/xpdf/xpdf -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/libpng/include -DXETEX_GRAPHITE -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/graphite/include -I/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/zlib/include -g -O2 -MT libxetex_a-FontTableCache.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/libxetex_a-FontTableCache.Tpo -c -o libxetex_a-FontTableCache.o `test -f 'xetexdir/FontTableCache.cpp' || echo '/home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/texk/web2c/'`xetexdir/FontTableCache.cpp In file included from /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include/unicode/utypes.h:36, from /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include/layout/LETypes.h:14, from /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/texk/web2c/xetexdir/FontTableCache.cpp:42: /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include/unicode/umachine.h:314: error: ‘char16_t’ does not name a type In file included from /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include/unicode/utypes.h:38, from /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include/layout/LETypes.h:14, from /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/texk/web2c/xetexdir/FontTableCache.cpp:42: /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include/unicode/uversion.h:167: error: ISO C++ forbids declaration of ‘UChar’ with no type /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include/unicode/uversion.h:167: error: expected ‘,’ or ‘...’ before ‘*’ token In file included from /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/texk/web2c/xetexdir/FontTableCache.cpp:42: /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include/layout/LETypes.h:223: error: ‘UChar’ does not name a type /home/ms/tex/xetex/TRUNK/build-xetex/libs/icu/include/layout/LETypes.h:237: error: ‘UChar’ does not name a type make: *** [libxetex_a-FontTableCache.o] Fehler 1 Thanks in advance Martin -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
2010/9/26 Philipp Stephani : > Am 26.09.2010 um 15:56 schrieb Axel Kielhorn: > >> Is the compose feature you mention the same as dead keys? > > No. Compose is a key available only from the X Window System. After hitting > Compose (it is not a modifier key), you can enter a known key KDE and Gnome have input methods for direct input of any unicode character: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode_input I haven't found anything like that for xterm yet, though. :-( Best Martin -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
2010/9/26 Axel Kielhorn : > Contributions are welcome, but please note that lshort is written in latin1 > and it will be difficult to show anything outside the latin range. Then it should be converted into utf8 first. This is 2010, not 1995. :-) Maybe it would be easier to write an xlshort, which simply assumes to use utf8 and can compose special characters (including unicode math :). Best Martin -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 20:11, schrieb Khaled Hosny:
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:26:47PM +0200, Marco wrote:
Axel Kielhorn writes:
Hello!
Some weeks ago I suggested getting information about XeTeX into lshort.
Well, here is the first draft.
In order to process it, you will need the lshort-4.31 source distributed with
TeXLive 2010
(or available from a CTAN mirror of your choice).
I want to limit this to the essential steps to get a document processed by
XeLaTeX.
I am open for suggestions and corrections (Note that I am not a native speaker.)
My plan is to submit this to Tobias later this year.
Axel
> From the text:
Some editors support digraphs, two letters that are combined into on
character. (In \wi{Vim} \texttt{ctrl-k o:} will be transformed into an
\"o, \texttt{ctrl-k JA} will created the mirrored R used by a russian
toy store chain.)\marginpar{How do you do this in emacs?}
Emacs has a whole set of various "Input methods", including a TeX method
that mimics the traditional TeX syntax for letters with accents and
diacritics. Sure you want to enter this topic? ;-)
Exactly, I don't see the point of discussing input methods in such a
short document; if I want to enter Unicode text I surely know a way to
do so or I can look for it in my editor/OS documentation.
Regards,
Khaled
Agreed. But one should at least give a reference link to information
about how to input Unicode in Windoof, OS X and Linux respectively.
There is no advantage in telling the people in lshort: "There is also
XeLaTeX, which lets you input everything in unicode and use any OpenType
or TrueType font on your system.", if you don't tell them how to do this
or at least where to find information about it. These people will simply
say: "What the heck is Unicode again? I simply press the keys on my
keyboard."
The "usual" Windows user has no to hardly any knowledge of input methods
other than what he is used to. Consequently he won't see any advantage
of _being allowed to_ enter any unicode character, if he isn't _able to_.
ciao
Toscho
PS: That said, I recall a anecdote, when an absolute Windoof and MS
Office user had to use my Laptop running Ubuntu and Open Office for live
beamer protocol. He first wondered, why he couldn't enter an e-acute by
pressing the acute-key and then the e-key. Later he wondered, why
couldn't enter all uppercase words by pressing Caps-Lock. And lastly he
wondered, why some strange symbol appeared, when he tried Caps-Lock again.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Problem changing default fonts
On 26/09/2010 20:40, Will Robertson wrote:
On 2010-09-27 02:14:03 +0930, Drébon said:
\usepackage{pxfonts}
\usepackage{txfonts}
\usepackage[osf,sc]{mathpazo}
You just changed the math/text font three times...
Oh... indeed...
So I guess in I should only have that kind of preamble :
\usepackage[osf,sc]{mathpazo}
\usepackage[euler-digits]{eulervm}%for math text
\usepackage{helvet} %for sans serif text
If you're only using UTF8 for Latin input text, you can use pdfLaTeX with
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
Well, this was not the aim... Actually in my preamble I have macro
definition that take place before anything... And that user may change
so that it contains anykind of unicode character... By just using
[utf8]{inputenc} latex processes those definition in iso-8859-1. So it
forces me to have two encoding in the same document (of course not the
same file).
But if you insist on using XeLaTeX, you should probably go the whole
hog and load a Unicode font. Try TeX Gyre Pagella as a replacement for
mathpazo as your text font. Something like
\setmainfont[
Extension=.otf,
UprightFont=*-regular,
ItalicFont=*-italic,
BoldFont=*-bold,
BoldItalicFont=*-bolditalic,
]{texgyrepagella}
If I am not wrong, this does only redefine the text font and not the
math font isn't it ?
Thank you very much for your answer.
--
Best wishes, D.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 19:33 schrieb Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd): Many of us also use WinEDT, though its lack of support for Unicode (even in its V6 guise, which some love and others hate) makes it unsuitable as an editor for most Xe[La]TeX use. Philip, have you tried to use TPU-edt mode inside GNU Emacs? Emacs Makes All Computing Simple -- Greetings Pete Experience is what you get when you don't get what you want. -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Problem changing default fonts
On 2010-09-27 02:14:03 +0930, Drébon
said:
\usepackage{pxfonts}
\usepackage{txfonts}
\usepackage[osf,sc]{mathpazo}
You just changed the math/text font three times...
\usepackage[scaled=0.85]{beramono}
\usepackage[euler-digits]{eulervm}
\usepackage{helvet}
...and this is the second change of the sans serif font.
I suggest culling your preamble a little.
The first group of packages are used to change the fonts. But if I use
the xltxtra package, they have no effect.
On the other hand, if I do not use xltxtra package, the œ character is
not accepted and thus 'cœu' becomes 'ceur'...
If you're only using UTF8 for Latin input text, you can use pdfLaTeX with
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
But if you insist on using XeLaTeX, you should probably go the whole
hog and load a Unicode font. Try TeX Gyre Pagella as a replacement for
mathpazo as your text font. Something like
\setmainfont[
Extension=.otf,
UprightFont=*-regular,
ItalicFont=*-italic,
BoldFont=*-bold,
BoldItalicFont=*-bolditalic,
]{texgyrepagella}
Cheers,
Will
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
On 9/26/2010 11:35 AM, Philipp Stephani wrote: This is not related to the operating system, but to the default keyboard layout. True. Let me rephrase, and the following apply to users in the US; things are different elsewhere, I'm sure. A Mac, out of the box with nothing added by the user, supplies easy access to a large number of Latin script characters with accents etc., through the default keyboard--and has done so for a very long time. A Windows machine does not and never has. Both Mac and Windows users can install additional keyboards. But Windows users who ask how to enter an e-acute often end up with that awful ALT method because that's what many people (and books and websites) think is the "standard" method. Alternatives such as the US-International keyboard are less well documented, at least in my experience--perhaps because they were introduced with later versions of Windows. Mac users who want to go beyond the default can enjoy the U.S. Extended keyboard, which provides a lot more Latin script accents and even combining marks, within a framework that is familiar to users (the OPTION key). Windows has nothing comparable. So I stand by my statement that Mac OS is better, at least for Latin script. (Things are different for Arabic, Indic scripts, etc.). I work mostly on Windows, so don't accuse me of being a Mac partisan. Sorry, this is a topic that pushes my buttons. End of rant. BTW, the default keyboard layouts on modern Linux systems are much more comprehensive than their equivalents on OS X, because only on the X Window System you have all three options: modifier keys, dead keys, compose sequences. Cool! DAvid -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
On 9/26/2010 1:11 PM, Michiel Kamermans wrote: Windows users use things like textpad (although because it still refuses to move to unicode I don't know what textpad is, but the built-in Windows Notepad (and most other Microsoft apps and applets) has supported Unicode since Windows NT. -- Mike Maxwell maxw...@umiacs.umd.edu "A library is the best possible imitation, by human beings, of a divine mind, where the whole universe is viewed and understood at the same time... we have invented libraries because we know that we do not have divine powers, but we try to do our best to imitate them." --Umberto Eco -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
On Sat, Sep 25, 2010 at 10:26:47PM +0200, Marco wrote:
> Axel Kielhorn writes:
>
> > Hello!
> >
> > Some weeks ago I suggested getting information about XeTeX into lshort.
> >
> > Well, here is the first draft.
> > In order to process it, you will need the lshort-4.31 source distributed
> > with TeXLive 2010
> > (or available from a CTAN mirror of your choice).
> >
> > I want to limit this to the essential steps to get a document processed by
> > XeLaTeX.
> >
> > I am open for suggestions and corrections (Note that I am not a native
> > speaker.)
> >
> > My plan is to submit this to Tobias later this year.
> >
> > Axel
> >
> >
>
> >From the text:
>
> > Some editors support digraphs, two letters that are combined into on
> > character. (In \wi{Vim} \texttt{ctrl-k o:} will be transformed into an
> > \"o, \texttt{ctrl-k JA} will created the mirrored R used by a russian
> > toy store chain.)\marginpar{How do you do this in emacs?}
>
> Emacs has a whole set of various "Input methods", including a TeX method
> that mimics the traditional TeX syntax for letters with accents and
> diacritics. Sure you want to enter this topic? ;-)
Exactly, I don't see the point of discussing input methods in such a
short document; if I want to enter Unicode text I surely know a way to
do so or I can look for it in my editor/OS documentation.
Regards,
Khaled
--
Khaled Hosny
Arabic localiser and member of Arabeyes.org team
Free font developer
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
On 09/26/2010 03:56 PM, Axel Kielhorn wrote: Am 26.09.2010 um 13:04 schrieb Pablo Rodríguez: if you allow me a suggestion I'd rather write “It's all Ελληνικά” instead of “It’s all γρηηκ to me”. I was actually thinking about that, but wondered if it would be too obscure. Now I have both variants and we can choose later. My suggestion should read “It's all Ελλενικά to me”. I forgot to type it in my previous message. “It's all Γρεεκ to me” (with first capitalized and epsilons instead etas) may be a good compromise. Just in case it might help, Pablo -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Axel Kielhorn writes:
> Hello!
>
> Some weeks ago I suggested getting information about XeTeX into lshort.
>
> Well, here is the first draft.
> In order to process it, you will need the lshort-4.31 source distributed with
> TeXLive 2010
> (or available from a CTAN mirror of your choice).
>
> I want to limit this to the essential steps to get a document processed by
> XeLaTeX.
>
> I am open for suggestions and corrections (Note that I am not a native
> speaker.)
>
> My plan is to submit this to Tobias later this year.
>
> Axel
>
>
>From the text:
> Some editors support digraphs, two letters that are combined into on
> character. (In \wi{Vim} \texttt{ctrl-k o:} will be transformed into an
> \"o, \texttt{ctrl-k JA} will created the mirrored R used by a russian
> toy store chain.)\marginpar{How do you do this in emacs?}
Emacs has a whole set of various "Input methods", including a TeX method
that mimics the traditional TeX syntax for letters with accents and
diacritics. Sure you want to enter this topic? ;-)
--
Marco
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] Problem changing default fonts
Hello,
I recently tried to convert my latex documents to xelatex... I
turned to xelatex because I needed to have some utf-8 processed things
in the preamble.
I encountered a problem with converting the font choices I made. I
used the following packages :
\usepackage{marvosym}
\usepackage{pxfonts}
\usepackage{txfonts}
\usepackage[osf,sc]{mathpazo}
\usepackage[scaled=0.85]{beramono}
\usepackage[euler-digits]{eulervm}
\usepackage{helvet}
%\usepackage{microtype}
\usepackage{textcase}
\usepackage{soul}
The first group of packages are used to change the fonts. But if I use
the xltxtra package, they have no effect.
On the other hand, if I do not use xltxtra package, the œ character is
not accepted and thus 'cœu' becomes 'ceur'...
I am looking for a solution letting me define the same outlooks as
before but with xelatex and that accepts the œ character.
As anyone such a solution ? Thank you.
--
Best regards, D.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Hello.
Le 26 sept. 2010 à 15:56, Axel Kielhorn a écrit :
A small detail about your XEsample.tex.
\begin{russian}
могу я Вам чем-л. помочь?% I hope this isn't a terrible curse or an insult,
never trust a dictionary
\end{russian}
It's not; it only means "may I help you with anything?". But you might want to
capitalise the first letter and expand the abbreviation, which would become:
Могу я Вам чем-либо помочь?
Best wishes,
Yves
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Michiel Kamermans wrote: While they're "available" for windows, windows users don't use them. Only people who transcend the OS label because they use multiple operating systems and have learned to like vim or emacs enough to want to use it on all their operating systems will also use these on windows. As an ex-VMS, now Windows, user, I completely agree. And of course, as an ex-VMS user, I continue to use EDT under Windows, courtesy of Boston Business Computing. Windows users use things like textpad (although because it still refuses to move to unicode, much less so than a few years ago), notepad++, notepad2, ultraedit, and all those "they started as windows programs so every windows user recommends them to their windows user friends". Many of us also use WinEDT, though its lack of support for Unicode (even in its V6 guise, which some love and others hate) makes it unsuitable as an editor for most Xe[La]TeX use. I have tried to acquire a taste for TeXworks, but it has the same shortcoming as WinEDT V6 : one "I do it all" button, where some (such as myself) would prefer separate buttons for PdfTeX, PdfLaTeX, XeTeX, XeLaTeX, Perl and so on (because a single job might require one or more runs of each, and changing the functionality of the "I do it all" button is a right pain in the @rse). Anything that's from the GNU stable can *very* safely be said to be a *nix thing, even though every single gnu program can be, and likely has already at this point been compiled for windows, too. Also agreed. Which is not to say that I do not use useful tools such as Wget, Rsynch, and so on. Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
On 9/26/2010 6:56 AM, Axel Kielhorn wrote: I have to disagree, Vim and emacs (or should that be Emacs?) are available on Windows as well. (Maybe not used that often.) While they're "available" for windows, windows users don't use them. Only people who transcend the OS label because they use multiple operating systems and have learned to like vim or emacs enough to want to use it on all their operating systems will also use these on windows. Windows users use things like textpad (although because it still refuses to move to unicode, much less so than a few years ago), notepad++, notepad2, ultraedit, and all those "they started as windows programs so every windows user recommends them to their windows user friends". Anything that's from the GNU stable can *very* safely be said to be a *nix thing, even though every single gnu program can be, and likely has already at this point been compiled for windows, too. - Mike "Pomax" Kamermans nihongoresources.com -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
This touches on a recent thread on a primer for XeLaTeX, which ended in http://wiki.xelatex.org/ (which I did not forget about to everyone who might suspect I have, conferences and moving house are currently robbing me of all my spare time) - Mike "Pomax" Kamermans nihongoresources.com -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Polyglossia, bidi and hyperref
* Vafa Khalighi (vafakh...@gmail.com) wrote:
|> ./test_qeiyafa.tex:22: Package bidi Error: Oops! you have loaded
|> package hyperr
|> ef after bidi package. Please load package hyperref before bidi
|> package, and th
|> en try to run xelatex on your document again.
|> See the bidi package documentation for explanation.
|> Type  H  for immediate help.
|> Â ...
|> l.22 \begin{document}
|> ?
|>
|> The error is saying that you have loaded hyperref after bidi. What
|> package does load bidi? certainly it is polyglossia so you have loaded
|> package hyperref after polyglossia and if you load hyperref before
|> polyglossia, then no error happens. So your example should be modified
|> into:
Thank you for the quick solution, Vafa. When trying to load polyglossia after
hyperref before, I did it only at the end of the preamble, believing hyperref
should be loaded last or next to last. This didn't work well either. I didn't
try your solution which is to load hyperref much earlier.
-- gildas
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 15:56 schrieb Axel Kielhorn: GNU Emacs offers input methods. One of them, always available, is C- q , and the number can be octal, decimal, or hexadecimal. You just have to memorize the Unicodecode:-) You never were tortured by MS-DOS etc. with its Alt- to draw a frame or table? You can learn by heart some dozen codes... -- Mit friedvollen Grüßen Pete Patriotismus ist die Überzeugung, dass unser Vaterland allen anderen Ländern überlegen ist, weil wir darin geboren wurden. (George Bernard Shaw) -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 15:56 schrieb Axel Kielhorn: I have to disagree, Vim and emacs (or should that be Emacs?) are available on Windows as well. (Maybe not used that often.) It's actually GNU Emacs and XEmacs. There are also specialised variants, based on GNU Emacs, like NTEmacs, Carbon Emacs, "NS or Cocoa Emacs", "AppKit Emacs", Emacs.app,... Is the compose feature you mention the same as dead keys? No, it's more than that. Compose o / will produce ø, compose L / will produce Ł, compose Y = gives ¥, compose o c will give ©, and many, many more combinations! -> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compose-Taste -- Mit friedvollen Grüßen Pete Treffen sich zwo Parallelen an einer Straßenecke. Sagt die eine zur anderen: "So, hier beginnt also die Unendlichkeit!" -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 16:44 schrieb David Perry:
>> On a Mac I can type \texttt{option-u u} to get an ü
> Mac OS has the best systemwide support for non-English characters, and has
> for a long time. Windows provides only a very awkward ALT key method that
> requires typing decimal or hex numbers.
This is not related to the operating system, but to the default keyboard
layout. A Windows keyboard layout can be as comprehensive as a Mac OS X one.
BTW, the default keyboard layouts on modern Linux systems are much more
comprehensive than their equivalents on OS X, because only on the X Window
System you have all three options: modifier keys, dead keys, compose sequences.
Windows and OS X have only modifier keys and dead keys.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 15:56 schrieb Axel Kielhorn:
>> Some operating systems or application offer "input systems" or "input
>> methods" which allow to enter non-standard characters.
>>
>> XeTeX also supports UTF-16 encodings. \XeTeXdefaultencoding{CharsetName} and
>> \XeTeXinputencoding{CharsetName} can set many others.
>
> IIRC anything but UTF-8 and UTF-16 is strongly discouraged.
What about UTF-32? It is quite rare for text documents, but nevertheless an
official Unicode encoding.
>
>> Me, I don't know of any font that switches typographic conventions based on
>> the script and language selected, what usually happens is that a different
>> set features is activated for the selected combination.
>
>> GNU Emacs offers input methods. One of them, always available, is C-q > number>, and the number can be octal, decimal, or hexadecimal.
>
> You just have to memorize the Unicodecode:-)
There are lots of other methods as well. The default input method (to be
activated via C-\) is RFC-1345, which seems to be the method that Vim uses for
its C-k sequences. C-q is just the most basic method.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 15:56 schrieb Axel Kielhorn: > Is the compose feature you mention the same as dead keys? No. Compose is a key available only from the X Window System. After hitting Compose (it is not a modifier key), you can enter a known key sequence to get a non-ASCII character; e.g., - - - is converted to an em dash (—). Dead keys are available as well, but the Compose mechanism provides access to more characters (because it is not limited to a single combination of modifiers, or a combination of a dead key and a base character). It is more comparable to ISO-1345 input in Emacs/Vim, but acts on a different level (windowing system vs. editor). -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
> No. I have read that on some Linux systems one can type a vowel, press > a "compose" key, and then an accent mark, the result is the vowel with > accent. The actual order is Compose, accent, vowel (or consonant, for that matter). The "accent" here is usually an approximative ASCII equivalent to the real accent mark: for example, Sun keyboards (that actually have a key labelled "Compose") used to use a single quote to input an acute accent, inverted quote for a grave accent, etc. Arthur -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
On 9/26/2010 9:56 AM, Axel Kielhorn wrote:
Is the compose feature you mention the same as dead keys?
No. I have read that on some Linux systems one can type a vowel, press
a "compose" key, and then an accent mark, the result is the vowel with
accent. I myself don't use Linux, so I'm sure the many Linux folks here
will correct me if I've got that wrong. A deadkey inserts the accent
(sometimes without showing any visual indicator); the accent then
appears over the following letter.
On a Mac I can type \texttt{option-u u} to get an ü
Mac OS has the best systemwide support for non-English characters, and
has for a long time. Windows provides only a very awkward ALT key
method that requires typing decimal or hex numbers.
David
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 06:13 schrieb David Perry:
> lshort is meant to be, well, short. Having even this much will give those
> unacquainted with xe(la)tex some idea of what it's all about, and the
> reference to the wiki will (I hope) be a good source of additional
> information.
This is meant as a showcase:
The following is possible, now RTFM.
> Here are a couple of suggestions and some typos to fix:
>
> "The main feature is the extended character set; [colon not comma] a font may
> contain Latin, Greek and Cyrillic [note caps] characters and the
> corresponding ligatures."
Thanks for the correction.
> You do allude to the various OpenType features that are available with
> Xe(La)TeX, but I think another sentence or two would be helpful. TeX has
> long supported some typographic refinements, such as true small caps, and
> many people use TeX because they care about high-quality typography.
> Directing their attention to other OT features such as different types of
> numerals, forms for all caps typesetting, etc. would help them understand the
> true benefits of OT, aside from its linguistic support.
Yes, the different numerals are a good example.
> "Some editors, _mainly on Linux,_ support digraphs, two letters that are
> combined into one [not on] character." The compose function is hardly ever
> used on OS X or Windows; the only instance of which I am aware is the
> OpenOffice extension that provides this facility.
I have to disagree, Vim and emacs (or should that be Emacs?) are available on
Windows as well. (Maybe not used that often.)
Is the compose feature you mention the same as dead keys?
On a Mac I can type \texttt{option-u u} to get an ü (which may sound silly,
since I have it on the keyboard, but I can type \texttt{option-u e} to get an ë
which is not on the keyboard.
> 4.8.2: I suggest a brief mention of polyglossia and a cross-reference to the
> other section where you discuss it in more detail.
>
> Under "It's all Greek to me," capitalize Unicode, Latin, Greek, Russian and
> Hebrew. "advantage of using" should be "advantage to using." Also, if you
> are going to explain \newfontfamily with polyglossia, I think you need to
> explain polyglossia's language-switching commands also, even if briefly.
I will look into it.
Axel
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 13:04 schrieb Pablo Rodríguez: > On 09/25/2010 06:44 PM, Axel Kielhorn wrote: >> Hello! >> >> Some weeks ago I suggested getting information about XeTeX into lshort. >> >> Well, here is the first draft. >> [...] >> I am open for suggestions and corrections (Note that I am not a native >> speaker.) > > Hi Axel, > > if you allow me a suggestion I'd rather write “It's all Ελληνικά” instead of > “It’s all γρηηκ to me”. I was actually thinking about that, but wondered if it would be too obscure. Now I have both variants and we can choose later. Axel -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 02:43 schrieb Vafa Khalighi: > Exuse us but I think this is too short and does not help anyone. The mailinglist stripped your attachment about the use of RTL languages. Since I'm a LGC[1] guy, I won't be able to write anything about RTL or CJK, except for the fact that it is possible with \XeTeX. [1] Well, I failed the Graecum thus I never advanced to the Hebraicum. Axel -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 01:17 schrieb Peter Dyballa:
> Instead of the not included DejaVu font family you might like to mention GNU
> Free fonts or Linux Libertine/Biolinum O, which are included in TeX Live.
You have a point here, I'll switch to Linux Libertine.
> Some operating systems or application offer "input systems" or "input
> methods" which allow to enter non-standard characters.
>
> XeTeX also supports UTF-16 encodings. \XeTeXdefaultencoding{CharsetName} and
> \XeTeXinputencoding{CharsetName} can set many others.
IIRC anything but UTF-8 and UTF-16 is strongly discouraged.
> Me, I don't know of any font that switches typographic conventions based on
> the script and language selected, what usually happens is that a different
> set features is activated for the selected combination.
> GNU Emacs offers input methods. One of them, always available, is C-q number>, and the number can be octal, decimal, or hexadecimal.
You just have to memorize the Unicodecode:-)
> Don't forget to mention that XeTeX does not load any font files but relies on
> a (modern) system's "font service" to deliver them upon request!
The font loading is done by fontspec.
Axel
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
I went a step backwards and created a short XeLaTeX document that contains everything I think is important for a XeLaTeX beginner. It includes: - fontspec -- Ligatures=TeX -- Ligatures=Rare -- Numbers=Lining -- Numbers=OldStyle -- Script=Cyrillic -- Language=Polish - polyglossia -- setdefaultlanguage -- setotherlanguage -- babelshorthands lshort will briefly describe how to get there. It does not include the following: - anything about RTL languages - - xepersian -- arabxetex - anything about CJK -- xeCJK -- zhspacing - unicode math Contributions are welcome, but please note that lshort is written in latin1 and it will be difficult to show anything outside the latin range. Axel XEsample.tex Description: Binary data -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Thank you very much for the corrections an comments. I have added some descriptions about using different languages. Here is the second draft. (Note: you have to add hologo to the preamble (in lshort.sty) and add greek to the language options in babel.) I have created a small demonstration file using XeLaTeX and the features described here, which I will send in a second message. Axel specxetex.tex Description: Binary data unicode.tex Description: Binary data -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
> Exuse us but I think this is too short and does not help anyone. "us"??? Arthur -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
Am 26.09.2010 um 06:13 schrieb David Perry: > "Some editors, _mainly on Linux,_ support digraphs, two letters that are > combined into one [not on] character." The compose function is hardly ever > used on OS X or Windows; He doesn't refer to the Compose key, but to editor support, which is platform-independent. The Compose key could of course be mentioned as well. But the input sequences of both the Compose key and RFC 1345 aren't digraphs in all cases. -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
On 09/25/2010 06:44 PM, Axel Kielhorn wrote:
Hello!
Some weeks ago I suggested getting information about XeTeX into lshort.
Well, here is the first draft.
[...]
I am open for suggestions and corrections (Note that I am not a native speaker.)
Hi Axel,
if you allow me a suggestion I'd rather write “It's all Ελληνικά”
instead of “It’s all γρηηκ to me”.
If you are using pure LaTeX, this would go “It's all
\foreignlanguage{greek}{Ellhnik'a} to me”. This use of a fancier font
that will not scare newcomers away.
I hope it helps,
Pablo
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Redefining \em and \emph
On 2010-09-25 09:33:20 +0930, Gareth Hughes
said:
Will Robertson wrote:
It doesn't seem to. In that case I'd write something like
\let\oldemph\emph
\renewcommand\emph{%
\...@rtl \expandafter\aemph \else \expandafter\oldelse \fi
}
I still can't figure out how to do this for \eminnershape as defined in
fixltx2e. Any suggestions how to do that?
Do you mean so that you can write
\aemph{ ... \aemph{ ...} ... }
and have the inner \aemph not put the overline on top? In this case,
you can write (and this might be a reasonable addition to polyglossia)
\documentclass{article}
\makeatletter
\def\aemph#1{%
\begingroup
\let\aemph\inneraemph
$\overline{\hbox{#1}}$%
\endgroup
}
\def\inneraemph#1{%
\egroup% close \hbox
\egroup% close \overline
$% close math
{\eminnershape #1}% inner emphasis!
$% "reopen" math
\expandafter\overline\bgroup % "reopen" \overline
\hbox\bgroup % "reopen" \hbox
}
\makeatother
\begin{document}
hello there \aemph{foo \aemph{oof rab} bar} baz black
\end{document}
Modulo checks for bidi and using \hboxR instead of \hbox and a
"correct" definition for \eminnershape in this context, and so on. But
this has nothing to do with the idea of \eminnershape: if you want to
tie the two together, fontspec actually overrides fixltx2e's
emph/eminnershape code:
\ExplSynaxOn
\DeclareRobustCommand \em {
\...@nomath\em
\tl_if_eq:xxTF \...@shape \itdefault \eminnershape
{
\tl_if_eq:xxTF \...@shape \sldefault \eminnershape \emshape
}
}
\DeclareTextFontCommand{\emph}{\em}
\cs_set_eq:NN \emshape \itshape
\cs_set_eq:NN \eminnershape \upshape
\ExplSyntaxOff
Not sure if that helps directly...
Will
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] XeTeX in lshort
David Perry wrote: Here are a couple of suggestions and some typos to fix: "The main feature is the extended character set; [colon not comma] Which did you intend, David ? You used a semi-colon (;) but proposed a colon (:). Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
