On 2/24/2017 10:35 AM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 17:20:05 +0100 schrieb Arthur Reutenauer:
I looked at the code and it actually uses an idea that I had already
tried. The problem I couldn't solve was do decompose a glyph.
Looking at an context example it seems that context can d
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 17:20:05 +0100 schrieb Arthur Reutenauer:
>> I looked at the code and it actually uses an idea that I had already
>> tried. The problem I couldn't solve was do decompose a glyph.
>> Looking at an context example it seems that context can do it. The B
>> with dot below (U+1E04)
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:45:04 +0100 schrieb luigi scarso:
>
>> no crash here with luatex 1.0.4 on my local box
>
> I just tried the lualatex examples with my luatex 1.0.4 too (I got
> it from w32tex.org) and the error seems to be gone.
ah w32
On 2/23/2017 6:26 PM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:55:08 +0100 schrieb Hans Hagen:
it's not a ligature but a multiple
fonts.handlers.otf.addfeature
{
name= "decompose",
type= "multiple",
nocheck = true, -- new trick
I updated my context version and
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:45:04 +0100 schrieb luigi scarso:
> no crash here with luatex 1.0.4 on my local box
I just tried the lualatex examples with my luatex 1.0.4 too (I got
it from w32tex.org) and the error seems to be gone.
--
Ulrike Fischer
http://www.troubleshooting-tex.de/
On 2/23/2017 6:26 PM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
With the standard fontloader of luaotfload there is no error but the
output is not correct.
btw, plain tests can be done with
mtxrun --script plain --make
mtxrun --script plain yourfile
(at least that is how Luigi and I test generic when plain cra
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 18:41:28 +0100 schrieb Hans Hagen:
> I think that you cannot drop the new context code in an old otfload,
> because (1) afaik otfload patches code,
Well not every fontloader version works, and it is always possible
that a too new (or too old) context fontloader breaks, but i
On Thu, Feb 23, 2017 at 6:26 PM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
> Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:55:08 +0100 schrieb Hans Hagen:
>
>> it's not a ligature but a multiple
>>
>> fonts.handlers.otf.addfeature
>>{
>> name= "decompose",
>> type= "multiple",
>> nocheck = true, -- new trick
>
>
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 16:55:08 +0100 schrieb Hans Hagen:
> it's not a ligature but a multiple
>
> fonts.handlers.otf.addfeature
>{
> name= "decompose",
> type= "multiple",
> nocheck = true, -- new trick
I updated my context version and changed my luaotfload.conf so that
> I looked at the code and it actually uses an idea that I had already
> tried. The problem I couldn't solve was do decompose a glyph.
> Looking at an context example it seems that context can do it. The B
> with dot below (U+1E04) ends as BU+0323 in the pdf. But how does
> context does it?
It u
On 2/23/2017 4:12 PM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:08:54 +0100 schrieb Hans Hagen:
Did you sent the second mail only for me for a reason or did you
only forget to add the list? Imho this is interesting for others
too.
well, it had an attachment that you can test which is not m
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:08:54 +0100 schrieb Hans Hagen:
>> Did you sent the second mail only for me for a reason or did you
>> only forget to add the list? Imho this is interesting for others
>> too.
>
> well, it had an attachment that you can test which is not meant for
> context (to which i'll
On 2/23/2017 3:05 PM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:08:54 +0100 schrieb Hans Hagen:
btw, i suppose most context enter composed glyphs anyway instead of
separate thingies
But as my example (for the B with dot below) shows that this fails
if the font hasn't the precomposed glyph.
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:08:54 +0100 schrieb Hans Hagen:
> btw, i suppose most context enter composed glyphs anyway instead of
> separate thingies
But as my example (for the B with dot below) shows that this fails
if the font hasn't the precomposed glyph.
Also the problem is not so much to contro
On 2/23/2017 1:35 PM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
Did you sent the second mail only for me for a reason or did you
only forget to add the list? Imho this is interesting for others
too.
well, it had an attachment that you can test which is not meant for
context (to which i'll add a similar collapse
Am Thu, 23 Feb 2017 13:19:12 +0100 schrieb Hans Hagen:
> On 2/23/2017 11:58 AM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
>> When using input like the following with xetex then harfbuzz kicks
>> in and one would always get the good looking precomposed U+1EA0 for
>> the A and the decomposed B+U+0323 for the B.
>>
>> W
On 2/23/2017 11:58 AM, Ulrike Fischer wrote:
When using input like the following with xetex then harfbuzz kicks
in and one would always get the good looking precomposed U+1EA0 for
the A and the decomposed B+U+0323 for the B.
With context (and lualatex) one get a rather bad looking -- as the
dot
When using input like the following with xetex then harfbuzz kicks
in and one would always get the good looking precomposed U+1EA0 for
the A and the decomposed B+U+0323 for the B.
With context (and lualatex) one get a rather bad looking -- as the
dot is misplaced -- output for the A0323 input
18 matches
Mail list logo
