[XeTeX] Kerning flaw with MinionPro XeTex xetex@tug.org
-2ex is OK, it looks remarkably like the output FontForge proposes. To John: I don't think there should be copyright infringements, as I'm modifying output, not the font per se. And what's more it's XeTeX that gets it wrong, by apparently ignoring the *right* kerning set by font designers. What I'm trying to do is just a workaround to remedy deficiencies in XeTeX. Now, back to the kerning=mykerns, I heard about a mycrotypography package, could it be of use to me? Since,as I told you all, this combination occurs very frequently--and my book is quite long--if I could put this setting in the prologue, I could spare myself a big waste of time. Thank you all for helping me so far. -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Kerning flaw with MinionPro XeTex xetex@tug.org
Am 06.02.2011 um 14:02 schrieb Alessandro Ceschini: -2ex is OK, it looks remarkably like the output FontForge proposes. You probably mean -0.2ex. 2ex is twice the width of an x. This would make the two characters change positions and sequence... Now, back to the kerning=mykerns, I heard about a mycrotypography package, could it be of use to me? No. Your additions could adjust how much the characters would protrude into the left and right margins. With pdfTeX the microtype package can also adjust the width of the characters; I'm not sure whether it also adjusts the amount of kerning... -- Greetings Pete We need a president who's fluent in at least one language. – Buck Henry -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Kerning flaw with MinionPro XeTex xetex@tug.org
Am 06.02.2011 um 15:44 schrieb Herbert Schulz: Hmmm... I thought 1ex was the height of an `x', not it's width, which makes measuring a width using ex's is kind of strange. A dimension or length is a dimension or length. Do you give the size of a box in ex \times em? Is a height inch shorter than a length inch? And what is the measure of a depth? 6 feet, like in graves? Anyway, lower case x are mostly as high as wide. (More perfect than o's.) -- Greetings Pete A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems. – Erdős Pál -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
Re: [XeTeX] Kerning flaw with MinionPro XeTex xetex@tug.org
On 7 February 2011 02:07, Peter Dyballa peter_dyba...@web.de wrote: Am 06.02.2011 um 15:44 schrieb Herbert Schulz: Hmmm... I thought 1ex was the height of an `x', not it's width, which makes measuring a width using ex's is kind of strange. A dimension or length is a dimension or length. Do you give the size of a box in ex \times em? Is a height inch shorter than a length inch? And what is the measure of a depth? 6 feet, like in graves? The size of an ex as compared to the em varies from font to font, so I don't like using this unit. The em is much more sensible from this point of view, because it is constant from font to font at the same point size (Modern interpretation has the em exactly equal to the point size, not the width of the letter M). The height of an x and the width of an M concepts don't make sense for alternative scripts. Anyway, lower case x are mostly as high as wide. (More perfect than o's.) Says who? Andrew -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
