2009/1/1 Jonathan Fine :
> What I want is for LuaTeX and XeTeX to have a shared 'extended dvi format'
> which is suitable for print, for generating PDF and possibly other purposes.
Thus loosing the benefits of directly producing PDF. I don't see many
benefits here.
But of course patches implementi
David Kastrup writes:
> So I don't think that the DVI format does not make for a sensible
> starting point for embedding such information.
Read what I mean, not what I write.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
___
dev-luatex mailing lis
Jonathan Fine writes:
> Yannis Haralambous wrote:
>
>> the original DVI format already supports 4-byte character, what more
>> Unicode-savviness do you need? Of course one should decide whether
>> DVI should contain glyph indexes or Unicode codepoints.
>
> I'd like bidirectional information to be
On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 11:09 PM, Jonathan Fine wrote:
>
> What I want is for LuaTeX and XeTeX to have a shared 'extended dvi format'
> which is suitable for print, for generating PDF and possibly other purposes.
Just curious: how do you print xdv (what's wrong with printing pdf?)
and what other pu
Yannis Haralambous wrote:
the original DVI format already supports 4-byte character, what more
Unicode-savviness do you need? Of course one should decide whether DVI
should contain glyph indexes or Unicode codepoints.
I'd like bidirectional information to be available.
Unless you mean by Uni
Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
[snip]
I'm looking for a what might be called a Unicode savvy Device Independent
binary format. And I'm looking for XeTeX and LuTeX to share code and
ideas, when possible.
Hence, what you're aiming at is for LuaTeX and XeTeX to produce some
common extended DVI for
Jonathan Fine skribis:
> I'm looking for a what might be called a Unicode savvy Device Independent
> binary format. And I'm looking for XeTeX and LuTeX to share code and
> ideas, when possible.
Glyph indexes plus a ToUnicode map. That's how Unicode-savviness is
done in a PDF: each glyph index
> Knuth and MacKay were the first to extent DVI, because it does not
> adequately support bidirectional typesetting.
Yes, and, as I already tried to communicate to you, this extended
format (I assume you mean DVI-IVD) seems to me like a dead end, because
at the time it was developed, over twent
the original DVI format already supports 4-byte character, what more Unicode-savviness do you need? Of course one should decide whether DVI should contain glyph indexes or Unicode codepoints.Unless you mean by Unicode-savviness that one should have both glyph indexes and Unicode codepoints (I think
Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
As subject. xdv is the eXtended DVi format used by XeTeX.
Actually, it can. LuaTeX produces DVI, which is perfectly palatable
to XeTeX's xdv2pdf and xdvipdfmx. What features of xdv are you missing
in LuaTeX's output?
Knuth and MacKay were the first to extent DVI,
> As subject. xdv is the eXtended DVi format used by XeTeX.
Actually, it can. LuaTeX produces DVI, which is perfectly palatable
to XeTeX's xdv2pdf and xdvipdfmx. What features of xdv are you missing
in LuaTeX's output?
Arthur
___
dev-luatex
11 matches
Mail list logo
