Re: [XeTeX] Problem with ocrb10.otf ligature 'fi'

2011-06-12 Thread Pander 
On 2011-06-13 01:01, Ross Moore wrote:
> Hello Pander,
> 
> On 13/06/2011, at 6:26 AM, Pander wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I have discovered a problem with ocrb10.otf the ligatures are not workig
>> correctly in xelatex. ttx from fonttools reports only these common
>> ligatures: ff-ffi-ffl-fi-fl. See example below for result. How to solve
>> this?
> 
> Where did you obtain your OCR fonts from?

TeX Live 2010

/usr/local/texlive/2010/texmf-dist/fonts/opentype/public/ocr-b-outline/ocrb10.otf

> I just downloaded the demo from here:
>   http://www.barcodesoft.com/ocr_font.aspx
> and the font file names are  OCRB.otf , OCRBI.otf , OCRBIII.otf ,
> and OCRBIV.otf  in OTF format.
> 
> Given that this is meant to be a mono-spaced font, I'd not expect
> to have any ligatures at all.

Me too. Would be better if they were not in there at all to avoid these
kind of errors all together.

Maybe TeX Live should use these OTF files?

> Changing your code example to:
> 
 {\fontspec{OCRB}abc ff ffi ffl fl fi}
 \bigskip

 {\fontspec[Ligatures={Required,Common,Rare}]{OCRB}abc ff ffi ffl fl fi}
 \bigskip

 {\fontspec[Ligatures={NoRequired,NoCommon,NoRare}]{OCRB}abc ff ffi ffl fl 
 fi}
 \bigskip
> 
> the result is attached below.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> On the other hand, if you get the free example from:
> 
>http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/page/fonts#ocrb
> 
> and look at the example document  ocr.pfb  then you
> can see that there are many examples of  fi ffi etc.
> using no ligatures.
> 
> Indeed looking at the repertoire using FontBook (on Mac OS X 10.6)
> there are no fi or fl etc. ligatures.
> 
> So it is not at all clear that what you are asking for makes
> much sense, with this font.
> 
> 
> But then maybe you have a version of OCRB that comes from a 
> completely different source? In which case, we need more details
> before further testing can be done.
> 
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Pander
> 
> 
> 
> Hope this helps,
> 
>   Ross
> 
> 
> 
> Ross Moore   ross.mo...@mq.edu.au 
> Mathematics Department   office: E7A-419  
> Macquarie University tel: +61 (0)2 9850 8955
> Sydney, Australia  2109  fax: +61 (0)2 9850 8114
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> 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] XePersian/bidi/LaTeX workshop in 42nd Iranian mathematical conference

2011-06-12 Thread Vafa Khalighi 
There is a workshop on XePersian/bidi/LaTeX in 42nd Iranian mathematical
conference. Dr. Amintoosi is teaching this workshop. For more information,
please see http://www.aimc42.ir/content.aspx?cid=8


--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex

Re: [XeTeX] Persian verus Farsi

2011-06-12 Thread Kamal Abdali 
Petr,

There is nothing wrong with names changing gradually as words in every
language change over time. But one is naturally concerned if the renaming is
needless, sudden, and suspected to be politically motivated, e.g., by the
decision of foreign governments or groups.

Names are a very sensitive matter. Just look at the large number of
countries and cities that have been renamed in the last 30 or so years:
Burma -> Myanmar, Ceylon -> Sri Lanka, Rhodesia -> Zimbabwe, Basutoland ->
Lesotho, Bombay -> Mumbai, Madras -> Chennai. The new names were adopted by
popular demand because the older names were thought to have been introduced
by colonizers, occupiers, ruling elites, etc.

Kamal Abdali

On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 18:14, Petr Tomasek  wrote:

> > There doesn't seem much to worry about Persian (or any other language)
> being
> > called differently in different languages. The cause for alarm is if a
> > particular language is suddenly and deliberately renamed by some group.
> In
> > English the subject language has been called "Persian" for centuries. So
> it
> > should be of concern that the Foreign Language School administered by the
> US
> > State Department calls it "Farsi"!
> >
> > Kamal Abdali
>
> What's wrong with it? It's natural that names do change and there
> doesn't have to be any "political" reason for that...
>
> --
> Petr Tomasek 
> Jabber: but...@jabbim.cz
>
> 
> EA 355:001  DU DU DU DU
> EA 355:002  TU TU TU TU
> EA 355:003  NU NU NU NU NU NU NU
> EA 355:004  NA NA NA NA NA
> 
>
>
>
>
> --
> 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] Problem with ocrb10.otf ligature 'fi'

2011-06-12 Thread Herbert Schulz 

On Jun 12, 2011, at 6:01 PM, Ross Moore wrote:

> Hello Pander,
> 
> On 13/06/2011, at 6:26 AM, Pander wrote:
> 
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I have discovered a problem with ocrb10.otf the ligatures are not workig
>> correctly in xelatex. ttx from fonttools reports only these common
>> ligatures: ff-ffi-ffl-fi-fl. See example below for result. How to solve
>> this?
> 
> Where did you obtain your OCR fonts from?
> 
> I just downloaded the demo from here:
>  http://www.barcodesoft.com/ocr_font.aspx
> and the font file names are  OCRB.otf , OCRBI.otf , OCRBIII.otf ,
> and OCRBIV.otf  in OTF format.
> 
> Given that this is meant to be a mono-spaced font, I'd not expect
> to have any ligatures at all.
> 
> Changing your code example to:
> 
 {\fontspec{OCRB}abc ff ffi ffl fl fi}
 \bigskip
 
 {\fontspec[Ligatures={Required,Common,Rare}]{OCRB}abc ff ffi ffl fl fi}
 \bigskip
 
 {\fontspec[Ligatures={NoRequired,NoCommon,NoRare}]{OCRB}abc ff ffi ffl fl 
 fi}
 \bigskip
> 
> the result is attached below.
> 
> 
> On the other hand, if you get the free example from:
> 
>   http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/page/fonts#ocrb
> 
> and look at the example document  ocr.pfb  then you
> can see that there are many examples of  fi ffi etc.
> using no ligatures.
> 
> Indeed looking at the repertoire using FontBook (on Mac OS X 10.6)
> there are no fi or fl etc. ligatures.
> 
> So it is not at all clear that what you are asking for makes
> much sense, with this font.
> 
> 
> But then maybe you have a version of OCRB that comes from a 
> completely different source? In which case, we need more details
> before further testing can be done.
> 
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Pander
> 
> 
> 
> Hope this helps,
> 
>   Ross

Howdy,

I have those fonts as part of TL2011 pretest and I think thye are also in 
TL2010.

Good Luck,

Herb Schulz
(herbs at wideopenwest dot com)






--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex

Re: [XeTeX] Problem with ocrb10.otf ligature 'fi'

2011-06-12 Thread mskala 
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011, Pander wrote:
> I have discovered a problem with ocrb10.otf the ligatures are not workig
> correctly in xelatex. ttx from fonttools reports only these common
> ligatures: ff-ffi-ffl-fi-fl. See example below for result. How to solve
> this?

Does this font contain ligatures at all?  It would seem to me that
ligatures like ffl would defeat the purpose of an OCR font.  I don't know
what version of OCR B you're using, but the one by Norbert Schwarz doesn't
contain ligatures, and neither do my nor Zdeněk Wagner's TeX packages
based on it, except for some things like Πthat have the status of letters
themselves rather than being pure ligatures.
-- 
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

Re: [XeTeX] Problem with ocrb10.otf ligature 'fi'

2011-06-12 Thread Ross Moore 
Hello Pander,

On 13/06/2011, at 6:26 AM, Pander wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I have discovered a problem with ocrb10.otf the ligatures are not workig
> correctly in xelatex. ttx from fonttools reports only these common
> ligatures: ff-ffi-ffl-fi-fl. See example below for result. How to solve
> this?

Where did you obtain your OCR fonts from?

I just downloaded the demo from here:
  http://www.barcodesoft.com/ocr_font.aspx
and the font file names are  OCRB.otf , OCRBI.otf , OCRBIII.otf ,
and OCRBIV.otf  in OTF format.

Given that this is meant to be a mono-spaced font, I'd not expect
to have any ligatures at all.

Changing your code example to:

>>> {\fontspec{OCRB}abc ff ffi ffl fl fi}
>>> \bigskip
>>> 
>>> {\fontspec[Ligatures={Required,Common,Rare}]{OCRB}abc ff ffi ffl fl fi}
>>> \bigskip
>>> 
>>> {\fontspec[Ligatures={NoRequired,NoCommon,NoRare}]{OCRB}abc ff ffi ffl fl 
>>> fi}
>>> \bigskip

the result is attached below.

<>
On the other hand, if you get the free example from:

   http://ansuz.sooke.bc.ca/page/fonts#ocrb

and look at the example document  ocr.pfb  then you
can see that there are many examples of  fi ffi etc.
using no ligatures.

Indeed looking at the repertoire using FontBook (on Mac OS X 10.6)
there are no fi or fl etc. ligatures.

So it is not at all clear that what you are asking for makes
much sense, with this font.


But then maybe you have a version of OCRB that comes from a 
completely different source? In which case, we need more details
before further testing can be done.

> 
> Regards,
> 
> Pander



Hope this helps,

Ross



Ross Moore   ross.mo...@mq.edu.au 
Mathematics Department   office: E7A-419  
Macquarie University tel: +61 (0)2 9850 8955
Sydney, Australia  2109  fax: +61 (0)2 9850 8114






--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex

Re: [XeTeX] [Off-topic] Persian versus Farsi

2011-06-12 Thread Petr Tomasek 
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 06:00:41PM -0400, Joel C. Salomon wrote:
> On 06/11/2011 05:32 AM, Vafa Khalighi wrote:
> > So Iranians from the first day called their country Eran or Iran and
> > Greeks and West world called it Persia. There is no disagreement between
> > Iranians for the English version of the language. All Iranians believe
> > that the language should be called Persian in English.
> 
> The Biblical books that deal with Persia call it "Paras"; the Talmud
> (written in nearby Babylonia c. 500 CE) refers to someone who comes from
> there as a "Parsi".

Well, but one should consider that in hebrew (at least in the late dialects
of which we know the exact pronunciation) as well as in some aramaic dialects
(syriac, for example) "p" and "f" are allophones. :-)

> There may have also been a distinction between the name for the region
> as opposed to the name of the empire, making the situation somewhat less
> clear.
> 
> --Joel

-- 
Petr Tomasek 
Jabber: but...@jabbim.cz


EA 355:001  DU DU DU DU
EA 355:002  TU TU TU TU
EA 355:003  NU NU NU NU NU NU NU
EA 355:004  NA NA NA NA NA





--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex

Re: [XeTeX] Persian verus Farsi

2011-06-12 Thread Petr Tomasek 
> There doesn't seem much to worry about Persian (or any other language) being
> called differently in different languages. The cause for alarm is if a
> particular language is suddenly and deliberately renamed by some group. In
> English the subject language has been called "Persian" for centuries. So it
> should be of concern that the Foreign Language School administered by the US
> State Department calls it "Farsi"!
> 
> Kamal Abdali

What's wrong with it? It's natural that names do change and there
doesn't have to be any "political" reason for that...

-- 
Petr Tomasek 
Jabber: but...@jabbim.cz


EA 355:001  DU DU DU DU
EA 355:002  TU TU TU TU
EA 355:003  NU NU NU NU NU NU NU
EA 355:004  NA NA NA NA NA





--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex

Re: [XeTeX] [Off-topic] Persian versus Farsi

2011-06-12 Thread Joel C. Salomon 
On 06/11/2011 05:32 AM, Vafa Khalighi wrote:
> So Iranians from the first day called their country Eran or Iran and
> Greeks and West world called it Persia. There is no disagreement between
> Iranians for the English version of the language. All Iranians believe
> that the language should be called Persian in English.

The Biblical books that deal with Persia call it "Paras"; the Talmud
(written in nearby Babylonia c. 500 CE) refers to someone who comes from
there as a "Parsi".

There may have also been a distinction between the name for the region
as opposed to the name of the empire, making the situation somewhat less
clear.

--Joel


--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex

[XeTeX] Problem with ocrb10.otf ligature 'fi'

2011-06-12 Thread Pander 
Hi all,

I have discovered a problem with ocrb10.otf the ligatures are not workig
correctly in xelatex. ttx from fonttools reports only these common
ligatures: ff-ffi-ffl-fi-fl. See example below for result. How to solve
this?

Regards,

Pander

\documentclass{article}\usepackage{fontspec}
\pagestyle{empty}\begin{document}

{\fontspec{ocrb10}abc ff ffi ffl fl fi}

{\fontspec[Ligatures={Required,Common,Rare}]{ocrb10}abc ff ffi ffl fl fi}

{\fontspec[Ligatures={NoRequired,NoCommon,NoRare}]{ocrb10}abc ff ffi ffl fl fi}

\end{document}


ocrb.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document


--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex

Re: [XeTeX] [Off-topic] Persian versus Farsi

2011-06-12 Thread Vafa Khalighi 
>
> That's so silly that you better return to kindergarten!
>
> Homosexuality exists world-wide as a natural phenomenon, as is the colour
> of eyes (or the language or the script). Some cultures are great and
> tolerant, some (Catholicism, Islam, Judaism, TV preachers) are not.
>
>
good for you!


--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex

Re: [XeTeX] Remaining problem with Delicious Bold Italic

2011-06-12 Thread Joachim Trinkwitz 
Am 12.06.2011 um 11:09 schrieb Pander:

> I have managered to figure out how to use all Delicious fonts in xelatex
> except Delicious Bold Italic.

I would recommend to use the font along those lines (works here anyway):

=
\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{fontspec}
\setmainfont[
  UprightFont={Delicious-Roman},
  BoldFont={Delicious-Bold},
  ItalicFont={Delicious-Italic},
  BoldItalicFont={Delicious-BoldItalic},
  SmallCapsFont={Delicious-SmallCaps}
]{Delicious}
\newfontfamily\heavy{Delicious-Heavy}

\pagestyle{empty}

\begin{document}

Delicious - Regular: ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz

Delicious - SmallCaps: 
\textsc{ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

 Delicious - Italic: 
\textit{ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

Delicious - Bold: \textbf{ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

Delicious - Bold Italic: 
\textbf{\textit{ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}}

Delicious - Heavy: {\heavy ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

\end{document}
==

Joachim

-- 
Dr. Joachim Trinkwitz E-Mail: j...@uni-bonn.de
Institut für Germanistik, Tel.: 0228-737565
Vergleichende Literatur-  www.germanistik.uni-bonn.de
und Kulturwissenschaftwww.comicforschung.uni-bonn.de
der Universität Bonn  53012 Bonn



delicious.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document



--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex

[XeTeX] Remaining problem with Delicious Bold Italic

2011-06-12 Thread Pander 
Hi all,

I have managered to figure out how to use all Delicious fonts in xelatex
except Delicious Bold Italic.

Please see the attached example. I hope someone can help me out on how
to enable Delicious Bold Italic. OTF can be downloaded here as freeware
http://www.exljbris.com/delicious.html

Thanks,

Pander
\documentclass{article}\usepackage{fontspec}
\pagestyle{empty}\begin{document}

Delicious - Regular\\%NOTE \fontspec{Delicious} results in Delicious Heavy
{\fontspec{Delicious-Roman}ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

Delicious - Italic\\
{\fontspec{Delicious}\itshape ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

Delicious - Bold Italic\\%FIXME
%{\fontspec{Delicious-BoldItalic} ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

Delicious - Bold\\%NOTE \fontspec{Delicious}\bfseries does not work
{\fontspec{Delicious-Bold} ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

Delicious - Heavy\\
{\fontspec{Delicious Heavy}ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

Delicious - SmallCaps\\
{\fontspec{Delicious SmallCaps}ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZabcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz}

\end{document}


--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex