Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Would something like this make you happy? That's what I've been using for years.
Put it in your preamble. And of course, change the parindent size to somheting
you like.
\makeatletter
\renewcommand\@makefntext[1]{%
\vspace{2pt}%
\setlength\parindent{-1.8em}%
\setlength\leftskip{1.8em}%
\makebox[1.8em][l]{\normalfont\small\@thefnmark.}#1}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\def\@makefnmark{{\addfontfeatures
{VerticalPosition=Superior}{\@thefnmark}}}
\makeatother
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
On 5 Jun 2011, at 21:09, Peter Dyballa wrote:
>
> Am 05.06.2011 um 21:54 schrieb Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd):
>
>> So why doesn't it ?!
>
> Phil,
>
> it does! It passes all \special{}s without touching them into the output
> file. Whether you're using the xetex or the xelatex command plays no role:
> you have only access to the xetex engine's transparency support which is Mac
> OS X service oriented. This Mac OS X service transforms the \special{}s into
> PDF code.
>
> The XeTeX engine needs to catch up with developments in PDF – or vanish.
> Could be LuaTeX and ConXeTeXt have a future.
I don't understand that.
Phil, the issue you're having is that the xetex option to specify transparency
as part of the font colour does not use \special{} commands, it's an extra font
property that is only supported by the (Mac-only, not-really-supported) xdv2pdf
driver. Currently, at least, the xdvipdfmx driver - which is your only option
on non-Mac systems - doesn't implement this.
On the other hand, it is *also* possible to specify transparency via PDF
\special{}s. That's what I presume TikZ does, and apparently it works with
xdvipdfmx. So you could do the same thing for text in plain xetex by writing
the appropriate \special{} commands in your document. (But no, I don't know any
details of exactly how to do that - sorry!)
JK
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
I don't think I really understand this, but never mind : I have a solution (TikZ) which I also need for another part of the project (fitting text to a path), so I'll just go with it ! ** Phil. -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
Am 05.06.2011 um 21:54 schrieb Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd):
So why doesn't it ?!
Phil,
it does! It passes all \special{}s without touching them into the
output file. Whether you're using the xetex or the xelatex command
plays no role: you have only access to the xetex engine's transparency
support which is Mac OS X service oriented. This Mac OS X service
transforms the \special{}s into PDF code.
The XeTeX engine needs to catch up with developments in PDF – or
vanish. Could be LuaTeX and ConXeTeXt have a future.
--
Greetings
Pete
Don't just do something, sit there.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
Peter Dyballa wrote: Am 05.06.2011 um 21:24 schrieb Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd): So how is it, I am forced to ask, that an add-on package can achieve something that the underlying engine cannot ? This seems very odd to me. The fontspec package does not use PDF specials which TiKZ/PGF uses. That's my simply explanation. It has built-in transparency support which is built-in into Mac OS X. Xdvipdfmx does not use this (yet). Yes, but I'm not using the fontspec package. I am using the raw \font primitive provided by XeTeX. Now if TikZ/PGF can achieve transparency using the XeTeX engine with xdvipdfmx, then the underlying engine must be able to do the same thing. So why doesn't it ?! ** Phil. -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
Am 05.06.2011 um 21:24 schrieb Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd): So how is it, I am forced to ask, that an add-on package can achieve something that the underlying engine cannot ? This seems very odd to me. The fontspec package does not use PDF specials which TiKZ/PGF uses. That's my simply explanation. It has built-in transparency support which is built-in into Mac OS X. Xdvipdfmx does not use this (yet). Unfortunately fontspec is targeted solely at (Xe)LaTeX users, whereas Will Robertson's "/X/?/TEX reference guide/" is targeted at all users of XeTeX and makes no mention under the entry for the extended syntax of \font that some of the options are not universally applicable, whence my confusion. It also supports LuaTeX. Since LuaTeX is connected somehow to ConTeXt, which can when based on the xetex engine produce transparency, it might be able to follow closely the fontspec documentation... -- Greetings Pete Give a man a fish, and you've fed him for a day. Teach him to fish, and you've depleted the lake. -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
Peter Dyballa wrote: Am 05.06.2011 um 14:06 schrieb Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd): What am I missing, please ? Mac OS X's deprecated xdv2pdf. And yet, Tikz/PGF can achieve transparency using the default driver (xdvipdfmx (0.7.8)), as Matthew Skala kindly pointed out and went on to demonstrate. So how is it, I am forced to ask, that an add-on package can achieve something that the underlying engine cannot ? This seems very odd to me. Andy Lin wrote : IIRC, the fontspec manual mentions that font transparency through font loading commands is only available on Macs because it requires the xdv2pdf driver. Unfortunately fontspec is targeted solely at (Xe)LaTeX users, whereas Will Robertson's "/X/?/TEX reference guide/" is targeted at all users of XeTeX and makes no mention under the entry for the extended syntax of \font that some of the options are not universally applicable, whence my confusion. Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
Am 05.06.2011 um 14:06 schrieb Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd): What am I missing, please ? Mac OS X's deprecated xdv2pdf. -- Greetings Pete Don't force it; get a larger hammer. – Anthony's Law of Force -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
By all means, Alessandro : ZIP all the files and send them direct as an attachment. Philip Taylor Alessandro Ceschini wrote: Sorry Phillip, but I can't find the way to post an attach here. I can't just copy all the .tex file in a mail, it's just too long! But, if you don't mind, I could send it to you via your mail. Obviously, if your enthusiasm has recovered, of course. -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Sorry Phillip, but I can't find the way to post an attach here. I can't just copy all the .tex file in a mail, it's just too long! But, if you don't mind, I could send it to you via your mail. Obviously, if your enthusiasm has recovered, of course. -- Alessandro Ceschini -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Alessandro Ceschini wrote: Will the prologue suffice? Different people differ in their expectations. If I ask someone to help me, I try to give them all of the information that they will need in order to (a) replicate the problem, and (b) endeavour to find a solution. Someone else may think that that is too much trouble, and just keep providing small parts of the information. I am afraid that, in the latter case, the enthusiasm of others to try to help may eventually peter out. As it has, for me, in this case. Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
IIRC, the fontspec manual mentions that font transparency through font loading commands is only available on Macs because it requires the xdv2pdf driver. -Andy -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Mongolian
Hi Gareth!
Thank you so much! I will take closer look at this tomorrow. Apparently the
Code2000 font has many drawbacks.
Best regards,
Jargal
-Original Message-
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 05/06/11 09:53, Жаргал Бадагаров wrote:
> > Hello members,
> >
> >
> > My name is Jargal. I am interested in the Mongolian Vertical Script Support
> > in MacOS. I have found a 2005 presentation of XETEX made in Uhan, where it
> > is said that Mongolian had not yet obtained a full support of all its
> > features.
> >
> > Do you know if it has been being developed so far? Any advancements for the
> > Mongolian Script Support? Any information would be highly appreciated as I
> > am quite a newbee in the field of unix/linux and macos,
> >
> > Thank you and have a good day!
> >
> > Jargal Badagarov
> >
>
> Dear Jargal,
>
> Welcome! I know absolutely no Mongolian, but I made decorative use of
> the vertical script in a poster for a seminar I gave on a couple of
> 13th-century ?ng?t monks. The PDF can be seen at
> http://www.garzo.co.uk/documents/poster.pdf. I've attached the source
> file. As you can see, I've used Code2000, which is not a specialist
> Mongolian font, but does the trick (I hope!). The XeTeX manual has
> instructions for writing vertical Chinese, which can be followed. As you
> can see \rotatebox{-90} is used to turn the text to vertical. I hope
> that helps a little. Maybe someday I shall learn some beautiful Mongolian!
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Gareth.
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iD8DBQFN67Ew9UDttp8yrx4RAjBpAKCVH7d3BRb4mnoE2yn1ZRH3QjTq1ACgp957
> TooHrEn35OejTn1t674a5J8=
> =DWF1
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
> ATTACHMENT: text/x-tex (poster.tex)
>
>
> --
> Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>
>
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Will the prologue suffice?
\documentclass[a4paper, 12pt, openany, draft]{book}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\defaultfontfeatures{Mapping=tex-text}
\setmainfont{Garamond Premier Pro}
\usepackage{polyglossia}
\setmainlanguage{french}
\setotherlanguages{dutch, english, german, latin, italian, spanish}
\setotherlanguage[variant=ancient]{greek}
\usepackage{xunicode}
\usepackage{xltxtra}
\usepackage{bookmark}
\setcounter{secnumdepth}{0}
\raggedbottom
\usepackage{soul}
\newfontfamily\greekfont[Script=Greek]{Garamond Premier Pro}
\newcommand{\og}{\guillemotleft}
\newcommand{\fg}{\guillemotright}
\usepackage{enumitem}
\setenumerate{nolistsep}
\setitemize{nolistsep, label=$-$}
\usepackage{footmisc}
--
Alessandro Ceschini
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Alessandro Ceschini wrote: My source is frenchb.ldf! Please take a look at this piece of code from frenchb.ldf dealing with footnotes: OK, two comments. 1) The use of ten inches appears to be as a sentinel, rather than the actual value intended for real use. 2) When I suggested you post your source, I mean by source "the document you are trying to typeset", not one or more of the sources you consulted when trying to write your document. Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Mongolian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/06/11 09:53, Жаргал Бадагаров wrote:
> Hello members,
>
>
> My name is Jargal. I am interested in the Mongolian Vertical Script Support
> in MacOS. I have found a 2005 presentation of XETEX made in Uhan, where it is
> said that Mongolian had not yet obtained a full support of all its features.
>
> Do you know if it has been being developed so far? Any advancements for the
> Mongolian Script Support? Any information would be highly appreciated as I am
> quite a newbee in the field of unix/linux and macos,
>
> Thank you and have a good day!
>
> Jargal Badagarov
>
Dear Jargal,
Welcome! I know absolutely no Mongolian, but I made decorative use of
the vertical script in a poster for a seminar I gave on a couple of
13th-century Öngüt monks. The PDF can be seen at
http://www.garzo.co.uk/documents/poster.pdf. I've attached the source
file. As you can see, I've used Code2000, which is not a specialist
Mongolian font, but does the trick (I hope!). The XeTeX manual has
instructions for writing vertical Chinese, which can be followed. As you
can see \rotatebox{-90} is used to turn the text to vertical. I hope
that helps a little. Maybe someday I shall learn some beautiful Mongolian!
Best wishes,
Gareth.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
iD8DBQFN67Ew9UDttp8yrx4RAjBpAKCVH7d3BRb4mnoE2yn1ZRH3QjTq1ACgp957
TooHrEn35OejTn1t674a5J8=
=DWF1
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
\documentclass[a4paper, 12pt]{scrartcl}
\usepackage{xltxtra, polyglossia, lettrine}
\setmainlanguage[variant=british]{english}
\setotherlanguage{syriac}
\defaultfontfeatures{Mapping=tex-text}
\setmainfont[
Numbers=OldStyle,
Ligatures=Historical,
ItalicFeatures={
Variant=2,
Style=Alternate},
Fractions=On]
{Linux Libertine O}
\setsansfont[
BoldFont={Museo 700},
Ligatures=Discretionary,
Numbers=OldStyle]
{Museo 500}
\newfontfamily\syriacfont[Script=Syriac, Scale=MatchLowercase]{East Syriac Adiabene}
\newfontface\phagspaseal[Script=Phags-pa, Scale=0.7]{BabelStone Phags-pa Seal}
\newfontface\phagspabook[Script=Phags-pa, Scale=0.7]{BabelStone Phags-pa Book}
\newfontface\bicig[Script=Mongolian]{Code2000}
\title{\vspace{-9pt}The Monks of Kublai Khan\\
\Large From Beijing to Baghdad and Beyond}
\author{Gareth Hughes}
\date{19:30 Tuesday 19\textsuperscript{th} May 2009\\Haldane Room, Wolfson College}
\subject{\vspace{-4em}Wolfson College Research Fellows' Seminar\\[10pt]
\textsyriac{Ü¥Ü²Ü Ü¬Ü²Ü«Ü¥ÜܼܬÝÜµÜ ÜÝÜ¡ÜµÜªÜ ÜܲÜÝÌ£ÜÝÜÜ²Ü ÜµÜÜµÜ ÜܲÜÝܪܲÜÝܲܢ ܨܵÜܡܵÜÜ}\\[5pt]
\raisebox{110pt}{%
\rotatebox{-90}{\phagspaseal ê¡ê¡ê¡ê¡¬ ê¡ê¡ê¡ê¡}
\rotatebox{-90}{\phagspabook ê¡ê¡ê¡ê¡¬ ê¡ê¡ê¡ê¡}
\rotatebox{-90}{\bicig\huge á ·á á ªá ªá á ¨ á °á á ¸á ®á }}
\includegraphics[scale=0.1]{Museum_für_Indische_Kunst_Dahlem_Berlin_Mai_2006_066.jpg}
\raisebox{110pt}{%
\rotatebox{-90}{\bicig\huge á ®á á · á ¶á á ªá á ¯á á ¾á }
\rotatebox{-90}{\phagspabook ê¡ê¡ ê¡ê¡ê¡ê¡}
\rotatebox{-90}{\phagspaseal ê¡ê¡ ê¡ê¡ê¡ê¡}}}
\pagestyle{empty}
\renewcommand*{\titlepagestyle}{empty}
\usepackage[xetex, colorlinks, pdfdisplaydoctitle,
pdfauthor={Gareth Hughes},
pdftitle={The Monks of Kublai Khan: From Beijing to Baghdad and Beyond},
pdfsubject={Wolfson College Research Fellows' Seminar},
pdfkeywords={},
pdfcreator={XeLaTeX with the Fontspec, Polyglossia, Lettrine and Hyperref packages}]{hyperref}
\begin{document}
\maketitle
\vspace{-1em}\lettrine{\textcolor{red}{I}}{n the second half of the 13\raisebox{2pt}{\scriptsize th} century}, two Christian monks of the Ãngüt tribe of Inner Mongolia set out from Beijing to make pilgrimage to Jerusalem. The Beijing from which they began their journey was known to them as Khanbalïq, the capital of Kublai Khan, Mongol Great Khan (1260--94), grandson of Genghis Khan, founder of the Yuan dynasty of China and suzerain of territory spread as far as Turkey in the west.
Near contemporaries of Marco Polo, yet reversed, the story of á¹¢ÄumÄ and Marqos, preserved in Syriac, takes us from Beijing, through the steppe of their tribal homeland in Inner Mongolia, along the Silk Road, winding around deserts and through mountain passes, and into the Central Asian 'Stans, Iran and Iraq.
á¹¢ÄumÄ and Marqos were monks of the Church of the East, governed by its Catholicos-Patriarch in Baghdad. Their Christianity was a truly Asian one, untouched by European `Christendom'. A church that had followers in India, South-East and Central Asia, China, Siberia, Afghanistan, Iran and Iraq. A church that is dubbed `Nestorian', an ancient heresy, by the European churches of Rome and Constantinople. Although the majority of Ãngüt were Christian, others practised Buddhism, Manichæism or Shamanism.
Politics, of both church and state, prevented the monks from achieving their goal of Jerusalem. Marqos was elected Catholicos-Patriarch of the East
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
I can't take time to absorb that, but it looks as if it wants to force the
indentation at the start of a footnote to be 1.5em, which ought to be OK
(rather more than I would have, but no matter just now).
Just before the first line of your text (after you've loaded all your
packages and so on), try
\global\parindentFFN=1.5em
and see what happens. Whatever is going on, it looks as if with your
current coding the program is attempting to put a giant amount of space
(surely wider than your actual text width) before the footnote cue, and that
is creating chaos.
If that is no good, I think I'll have to bow out of this thread - sorry!
John
- Original Message -
From: "Alessandro Ceschini"
To: "Customizing footnote markers"
Sent: 05 June 2011 17:25
Subject: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
To be honest, I wouldn't worry about the \makeatletter nonsense; it
really
isn't at the heart of your problem. If you are getting an \hbox that
is
overfull
by over 381pt (5.27"), the numbers have all but disappeared, and the
text
appears to be cut, then John Was's suggestion that an indentation of
ten
inches might not have been what you intended may well be the cause.
My source is frenchb.ldf!
Please take a look at this piece of code from frenchb.ldf dealing with
footnotes:
\newcommand*{\dotFFN}{.}
\newcommand*{\kernFFN}{\kern .5em}
\newdimen\parindentFFN
\parindentFFN=10in
\def\ftnISsymbol{\@fnsymbol\c@footnote}
\long\def\@makefntextFB#1{\ifx\thefootnote\ftnISsymbol
\@makefntextORI{#1}%
\else
\parindent=\parindentFFN
\rule\z@\footnotesep
\setbox\@tempboxa\hbox{\@thefnmark}%
\ifdim\wd\@tempboxa>\z@
\llap{\@thefnmark}\dotFFN\kernFFN
\fi #1
\fi}%
\AtBeginDocument{\@ifpackageloaded{bigfoot}{}%
{\ifdim\parindentFFN<10in
\else
\parindentFFN=\parindent
\ifdim\parindentFFN<1.5em\parindentFFN=1.5em\fi
\fi
\let\@makefntextORI\@makefntext
\long\def\@makefntext#1{%
\ifFBFrenchFootnotes
\@makefntextFB{#1}%
\else
\@makefntextORI{#1}%
\fi}%
}%
}
--
Alessandro Ceschini
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
> To be honest, I wouldn't worry about the \makeatletter nonsense; it
> really
> isn't at the heart of your problem. If you are getting an \hbox that
> is
> overfull
> by over 381pt (5.27"), the numbers have all but disappeared, and the
> text
> appears to be cut, then John Was's suggestion that an indentation of
> ten
> inches might not have been what you intended may well be the cause.
My source is frenchb.ldf!
Please take a look at this piece of code from frenchb.ldf dealing with
footnotes:
\newcommand*{\dotFFN}{.}
\newcommand*{\kernFFN}{\kern .5em}
\newdimen\parindentFFN
\parindentFFN=10in
\def\ftnISsymbol{\@fnsymbol\c@footnote}
\long\def\@makefntextFB#1{\ifx\thefootnote\ftnISsymbol
\@makefntextORI{#1}%
\else
\parindent=\parindentFFN
\rule\z@\footnotesep
\setbox\@tempboxa\hbox{\@thefnmark}%
\ifdim\wd\@tempboxa>\z@
\llap{\@thefnmark}\dotFFN\kernFFN
\fi #1
\fi}%
\AtBeginDocument{\@ifpackageloaded{bigfoot}{}%
{\ifdim\parindentFFN<10in
\else
\parindentFFN=\parindent
\ifdim\parindentFFN<1.5em\parindentFFN=1.5em\fi
\fi
\let\@makefntextORI\@makefntext
\long\def\@makefntext#1{%
\ifFBFrenchFootnotes
\@makefntextFB{#1}%
\else
\@makefntextORI{#1}%
\fi}%
}%
}
--
Alessandro Ceschini
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Alessandro Ceschini wrote: I'm sorry, Phillip, the problem is that I don't know much about the \makeatletter programming environment. I just deal with normal Latex commands, so that's really Arabic for me. The only thing I can tell you is I get loads of warning messages like this: Overfull \hbox (381.70668pt too wide) in paragraph at lines 641--641 [][]\EU1/GaramondPremierPro(0)/m/n/10 67. []MIDALI| [43] And no indentation to be seen, actually numbers have all but disappeared and the text appears to be cut. To be honest, I wouldn't worry about the \makeatletter nonsense; it really isn't at the heart of your problem. If you are getting an \hbox that is overfull by over 381pt (5.27"), the numbers have all but disappeared, and the text appears to be cut, then John Was's suggestion that an indentation of ten inches might not have been what you intended may well be the cause. Post your source (or put it on a web server and post the URL) and someone will without doubt come to your aid. Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
That huge overfull \hbox is surely because you have specified 10 inches as the indentation. Try 10pt instead of 10in (leaving everything else as given), and see what happens. John - Original Message - From: "Alessandro Ceschini" To: "Customizing footnote markers" Sent: 05 June 2011 16:59 Subject: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers doesn't seem calculated to encourage further help. Perhaps if you were to tell us in what way "it doesn't work", and and/or attach a minimal source document that demonstrates the problem, there would be a greater probability of someone getting to the root of your problem. I'm sorry, Phillip, the problem is that I don't know much about the \makeatletter programming environment. I just deal with normal Latex commands, so that's really Arabic for me. The only thing I can tell you is I get loads of warning messages like this: Overfull \hbox (381.70668pt too wide) in paragraph at lines 641--641 [][]\EU1/GaramondPremierPro(0)/m/n/10 67. []MIDALI| [43] And no indentation to be seen, actually numbers have all but disappeared and the text appears to be cut. -- Alessandro Ceschini -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
> doesn't seem calculated to encourage further help. Perhaps if you > were to tell us in what way "it doesn't work", and and/or attach > a minimal source document that demonstrates the problem, there > would be a greater probability of someone getting to the root of > your problem. I'm sorry, Phillip, the problem is that I don't know much about the \makeatletter programming environment. I just deal with normal Latex commands, so that's really Arabic for me. The only thing I can tell you is I get loads of warning messages like this: Overfull \hbox (381.70668pt too wide) in paragraph at lines 641--641 [][]\EU1/GaramondPremierPro(0)/m/n/10 67. []MIDALI| [43] And no indentation to be seen, actually numbers have all but disappeared and the text appears to be cut. -- Alessandro Ceschini -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
John Was wrote:
I'm sure '10in' is a mistake - rather 10pt?
And try replacing
\hbox to \parindentFFN {}
with
\hbox to \parindentFFN{\hfill}
Why, John ? An \hbox can be empty, surely ?
(no space after FFN).
Again, why, John ? \parindentFFN is a control word, and
therefore soaks up the following space.
** Phil.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Forgive my bluntness, but It doesn't work, anyhow. doesn't seem calculated to encourage further help. Perhaps if you were to tell us in what way "it doesn't work", and and/or attach a minimal source document that demonstrates the problem, there would be a greater probability of someone getting to the root of your problem. Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
I'm sure '10in' is a mistake - rather 10pt?
And try replacing
\hbox to \parindentFFN {}
with
\hbox to \parindentFFN{\hfill}
(no space after FFN).
I would also replace
\@thefnmark.~#1
with
\@thefnmark.\kern 0.5em #1
Otherwise the ~ will give a variable space after each footnote-cue, whereas
it will look much better if there is a consistent space between each cue and
the text of the footnote (it doesn't have to be 0.5em: you could say 5pt,
or whatever you think will look best).
But I don't speak LaTeX either, and you may be doing something else wrong!
John
- Original Message -
From: "Alessandro Ceschini"
To: "Customizing footnote markers"
Sent: 05 June 2011 16:32
Subject: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
So should it look like this:
\makeatletter
\newdimen\parindentFFN
\parindentFFN=10in
\renewcommand \@makefntext [1]%
{%
\leavevmode \hbox to \parindentFFN {}\@thefnmark.~#1%
}
\makeatother
It doesn't work, anyhow.
--
Alessandro Ceschini
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
So should it look like this:
\makeatletter
\newdimen\parindentFFN
\parindentFFN=10in
\renewcommand \@makefntext [1]%
{%
\leavevmode \hbox to \parindentFFN {}\@thefnmark.~#1%
}
\makeatother
It doesn't work, anyhow.
--
Alessandro Ceschini
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
I'd be curious to know what kind of a book could support a ten-inch indentation
before the footnote-cue...
John
- Original Message -
From: Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd)
To: Customizing footnote markers
Cc: Alessandro Ceschini
Sent: 05 June 2011 16:21
Subject: Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Alessandro Ceschini wrote:
Well, it looks to me as if the expansion of @makefntext tries
to perform an assignment to \parindentFFN (even though
you omitted an explicit assignment operator); surely this is
not what you intended ?
I intended to have an indentation before the footnote marker.
Ah, but what you have, rather than an indentation, is the intended
dimension of the intendation (ten inches, in this case). If you want
this dimension to be used to effect an indentation, then you need to
add a command to cause an indentation (of specified dimension)
to take place. I don't speak LaTeX, but you might consider (e.g.)
\renewcommand \@makefntext [1]%
{%
\leavevmode \hbox to \parindentFFN {}\@thefnmark.~#1%
}
or something along those lines.
Philip Taylor
--
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Alessandro Ceschini wrote:
Well, it looks to me as if the expansion of @makefntext tries
to perform an assignment to \parindentFFN (even though
you omitted an explicit assignment operator); surely this is
not what you intended ?
I intended to have an indentation before the footnote marker.
Ah, but what you have, rather than an indentation, is the intended
/dimension /of the intendation (ten inches, in this case). If you want
this dimension to be used to effect an indentation, then you need to
add a command to cause an indentation (of specified dimension)
to take place. I don't speak LaTeX, but you might consider (e.g.)
\renewcommand \@makefntext [1]%
{%
\leavevmode \hbox to \parindentFFN {}\@thefnmark.~#1%
}
or something along those lines.
Philip Taylor
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
> Well, it looks to me as if the expansion of @makefntext tries > to perform an assignment to \parindentFFN (even though > you omitted an explicit assignment operator); surely this is > not what you intended ? I intended to have an indentation before the footnote marker. -- Alessandro Ceschini -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
Alessandro Ceschini wrote:
As I wrote: "look in frenchb.ldf to find the french settings." The
definition of \@makefntext above is a simple example. Adjust it to
your need.
Since what I'm lacking here is indentation I tried to put together the
following collage by pasting a piece of code from frenchb.ldf.
\makeatletter
\newdimen\parindentFFN
\parindentFFN=10in
\renewcommand\@makefntext[1]{%
\parindentFFN\@thefnmark.~#1}
\makeatother
But I get the following error message:
! Illegal unit of measure (pt inserted).
\unhbox
Anyone knows why it doesn't work?
Well, it looks to me as if the expansion of @makefntext tries
to perform an assignment to \parindentFFN (even though
you omitted an explicit assignment operator); surely this is
not what you intended ?
Philip Taylor
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
Thank you for your further comments, Mathew :
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
The default driver for XeTeX is xdvipdfmx; you're probably already using
it, so that's most likely not your problem.
Yes, this is a XeTeX-specific question (I need non-TeX fonts), so I am using
the XeTeX default driver.
My next guess would be that there may be an issue with whatever you're
using to view the resulting .pdf file.
Same results in the TeXworks previewer, Adobe Reader 10.x and Adobe
Acrobat 7.x
You may be able to check the version of your PDF files with the "file" or
"pdfinfo" commands. My transparency-containing PDFs are reported
as version 1.5.
V1.5 (see below)
E:\TeX\Projects\Tests\TAR>pdfinfo TAR-1.pdf
Creator: XeTeX output 2011.06.05:1514
Producer: xdvipdfmx (0.7.8)
CreationDate: 06/05/11 15:14:36
Tagged: no
Pages: 1
Encrypted: no
Page size: 841.89 x 595.28 pts (A4)
File size: 25465 bytes
Optimized: no
PDF version:1.5
Another thing to try: it's possible that using a transparent colour for
your text with the "color=" feature doesn't work even if using some other
route to transparency would work. I tried to reproduce your problem and
realized that the feature whose documentation you quoted from is a Plain
XeTeX feature associated with the "\font" command. I'm not familiar
enough with that low-level command to test it reliably; the approach I've
used, which has worked for me, is to use transparency at the level of TikZ
(they call it "opacity", which is just the inverse) in LaTeX, something
like this:
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[color=blue,opacity=0.2] at (0,0) {Blah blah};
\end{tikzpicture}
I think it'd be worth trying to set the colour and opacity in that way
rather than through the low-level \font command.
YES :-))) Finally it works. As I am already using TikZ because I also need
text-along-a-path, this solution is perfect. Thank you very much indeed
(but of course I would dearly love to know why the documented RGBA
specifier for the font colour does not work !).
Make sure your print shop can handle transparency. If they can't, you'll
be wasting your time trying to resolve the software issues on your own
end. I've heard professional designers claim snarkily that any shop that
can't handle (the very latest bleeding-edge optional features of...)
standard formats shouldn't be in the business, but it's a fact that many
shops who deal with the general public (e.g. Lulu, and Amazon CreateSpace)
insist resolving transparency should be the customer's problem, not theirs.
Unfortunately I am separated from the print shop by an intermediary
(the son of the shop owner), and I haven't even heard back from him
whether my first attempts (using Paintshop Pro X) will be suitable or
whether I need to pursue this XeTeX/TikZ route at all ...
Is it *really* prohibitive to rasterize? The resulting file sizes
shouldn't be all that bad, because of compression, and anyone with a
printer that handles huge media ought to be able to deal with files of the
size doing so requires. They have to print photos on their printer once
in a while, and as soon as they do, they'll be handling files larger
than yours.
I have no idea how the print shop will produce a 7m-long sign; for now,
I leave that up to them ! But at least I can now produce both
text-on-a-path
and transparency, so I feel that there is at last light at the end of
the tunnel.
Once again, many many thanks.
Philip Taylor
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] Customizing footnote markers
> As I wrote: "look in frenchb.ldf to find the french settings." The
> definition of \@makefntext above is a simple example. Adjust it to
> your need.
Since what I'm lacking here is indentation I tried to put together the
following collage by pasting a piece of code from frenchb.ldf.
\makeatletter
\newdimen\parindentFFN
\parindentFFN=10in
\renewcommand\@makefntext[1]{%
\parindentFFN\@thefnmark.~#1}
\makeatother
But I get the following error message:
! Illegal unit of measure (pt inserted).
\unhbox
Anyone knows why it doesn't work?
--
Alessandro Ceschini
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
On Sun, 5 Jun 2011, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote:
> Thank you for your prompt response, Mathew. In fact, I am using the default
> driver (I am not aware how I might alter this), and was simply relying on it
> to "do the right thing". If you could tell me how to identify the driver, and
> what possible additional options I might pass to it to improve matters, I
The default driver for XeTeX is xdvipdfmx; you're probably already using
it, so that's most likely not your problem. I'm not actually sure XeTeX
*can* work with any other... but other TeX engines can. In particular:
* If you're using the "tex" or "latex" command to typeset your document,
the output will generally be a .dvi file that can be processed by
multiple drivers (but probably can't handle the kinds of graphics
you're doing).
* If you're using "pdftex" or "pdflatex", I think those have their own
driver built in, as well as possibly an option to generate DVIs.
* If you're using XeTeX or XeLaTeX, it will by default run xdvipdfmx; I
think it's possible to separate that into another step with the
-no-pdf option, but I don't know what other drivers can read the
resulting .xdv file.
My next guess would be that there may be an issue with whatever you're
using to view the resulting .pdf file. Acrobat Reader should handle
transparency (I don't have a copy handy to check, but it's usually thought
of as the gold standard); my installations of "xpdf" and KDE's "okular"
both do it; but I think older versions of xpdf don't, and there are
many other PDF viewers out there.
You may be able to check the version of your PDF files with the "file" or
"pdfinfo" commands. My transparency-containing PDFs are reported
as version 1.5.
Another thing to try: it's possible that using a transparent colour for
your text with the "color=" feature doesn't work even if using some other
route to transparency would work. I tried to reproduce your problem and
realized that the feature whose documentation you quoted from is a Plain
XeTeX feature associated with the "\font" command. I'm not familiar
enough with that low-level command to test it reliably; the approach I've
used, which has worked for me, is to use transparency at the level of TikZ
(they call it "opacity", which is just the inverse) in LaTeX, something
like this:
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[color=blue,opacity=0.2] at (0,0) {Blah blah};
\end{tikzpicture}
I think it'd be worth trying to set the colour and opacity in that way
rather than through the low-level \font command.
> be most grateful. As you correctly anticipate, rasterising the output would
> be self-defeating : the whole object of this exercise is to generate a PDF
> that
> contains embedded scaleable fonts and glyphs.
Make sure your print shop can handle transparency. If they can't, you'll
be wasting your time trying to resolve the software issues on your own
end. I've heard professional designers claim snarkily that any shop that
can't handle (the very latest bleeding-edge optional features of...)
standard formats shouldn't be in the business, but it's a fact that many
shops who deal with the general public (e.g. Lulu, and Amazon CreateSpace)
insist resolving transparency should be the customer's problem, not theirs.
Is it *really* prohibitive to rasterize? The resulting file sizes
shouldn't be all that bad, because of compression, and anyone with a
printer that handles huge media ought to be able to deal with files of the
size doing so requires. They have to print photos on their printer once
in a while, and as soon as they do, they'll be handling files larger
than yours.
--
Matthew Skala
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before principles.
http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] Mongolian
Hello members, My name is Jargal. I am interested in the Mongolian Vertical Script Support in MacOS. I have found a 2005 presentation of XETEX made in Uhan, where it is said that Mongolian had not yet obtained a full support of all its features. Do you know if it has been being developed so far? Any advancements for the Mongolian Script Support? Any information would be highly appreciated as I am quite a newbee in the field of unix/linux and macos, Thank you and have a good day! Jargal Badagarov -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: Transparency depends very much on the output driver and its settings. I have used it successfully with xdvipdfm, by way of the "opacity" optin in TikZ; but the resulting output files are version 1.5 PDFs which not every printer supports. If you're using some other driver (for instance, anything that goes to Postscript instead of PDF), or if your printer doesn't like transparency, there may be problems. It is possible to use Ghostscript to resolve the transparency (convert to a non-transparent PDF or Postscript file that still looks at it should) but it appears to accomplish that by rasterizing the file, which may not be suitable for your purposes. Thank you for your prompt response, Mathew. In fact, I am using the default driver (I am not aware how I might alter this), and was simply relying on it to "do the right thing". If you could tell me how to identify the driver, and what possible additional options I might pass to it to improve matters, I would be most grateful. As you correctly anticipate, rasterising the output would be self-defeating : the whole object of this exercise is to generate a PDF that contains embedded scaleable fonts and glyphs. Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
On Sun, 5 Jun 2011, Philip TAYLOR (Webmaster, Ret'd) wrote: > However, experimenting with all possible values from "00" to "FF" > for the transparency byte seems to have zero effect, in that the > second element laid down completely obscures whatever lies > beneath it. What am I missing, please ? Transparency depends very much on the output driver and its settings. I have used it successfully with xdvipdfm, by way of the "opacity" optin in TikZ; but the resulting output files are version 1.5 PDFs which not every printer supports. If you're using some other driver (for instance, anything that goes to Postscript instead of PDF), or if your printer doesn't like transparency, there may be problems. It is possible to use Ghostscript to resolve the transparency (convert to a non-transparent PDF or Postscript file that still looks at it should) but it appears to accomplish that by rasterizing the file, which may not be suitable for your purposes. -- Matthew Skala msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca People before principles. http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/ -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
[XeTeX] "Options for all fonts" : colo[u]r, and the transparency byte
Will Robertson's "/X/?/TEX reference guide/" reads (in part) color=RRGGBB[TT] Triple pair of hex values to specify the colour in RGB space, with an optional value for the transparency. However, experimenting with all possible values from "00" to "FF" for the transparency byte seems to have zero effect, in that the second element laid down completely obscures whatever lies beneath it. What am I missing, please ? Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
