On 30-6-2011 10:46, Julian Becker wrote:
Hello everybody!
I tried doing some math typesetting with Cambria, but somehow the integral
sign comes out somewhat smaller than it should be.
Running the following in the latest beta produces the attached pdf. Does
anybody have an idea about what's goi
Thanks Khaled,
this works like a charm!
Best wishes,
Julian
2011/7/1 Khaled Hosny
> Try setting \Umathoperatorsize\displaystyle=2em or so until you find a
> suitable value.
>
> On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 09:25:27AM +0200, Julian Becker wrote:
> > In this case, is there a quick workaround? I tried
Try setting \Umathoperatorsize\displaystyle=2em or so until you find a
suitable value.
On Fri, Jul 01, 2011 at 09:25:27AM +0200, Julian Becker wrote:
> In this case, is there a quick workaround? I tried something like redefining \
> int
> using
> \def\int{\getglyph{CambriaMath}{\char"F05C2}\intli
In this case, is there a quick workaround? I tried something like redefining
\int
using
\def\int{\getglyph{CambriaMath}{\char"F05C2}\intlimits}
This gives the desired result in displaystyle, but is incompatible with
scriptstyle math. Is there a way to adapt this workaround to account for
this in s
Am 20:59, schrieb Julian Becker:
Hello everybody!
I tried doing some math typesetting with Cambria, but somehow the
integral sign comes out somewhat smaller than it should be.
Running the following in the latest beta produces the attached pdf.
Does anybody have an idea about what's going wrong
On 06/30/2011 10:46 AM, Julian Becker wrote:
Hello everybody!
I tried doing some math typesetting with Cambria, but somehow the
integral sign comes out somewhat smaller than it should be.
Running the following in the latest beta produces the attached pdf.
Does anybody have an idea about what's
