On Nov 11, 2011, at 7:06 AM, Philip TAYLOR wrote:
>> I've never used this myself, but the documentation you quote does say:
>>
scaled ‹int›
>>
>> which presumably means that an *integer* is required as an argument to
>> 'scaled'.
>> That would lead me to believe that 'scaled' works like T
On Sep 16, 2011, at 4:59 AM, Sébastien Mengin wrote:
>>> \documentclass{book}
>>> \RequirePackage{fontspec}
>>> \RequirePackage{xunicode}
>>> \RequirePackage[french]{babel}
>>> \setmonofont{Lucida Sans Typewriter}
I had to change this to
\setmonofont{LucidaSansTypewriterStd} on my Mac.
> I do
On Sep 15, 2011, at 4:17 PM, Sébastien Mengin wrote:
> \documentclass{book}
> \RequirePackage{fontspec}
> \RequirePackage{xunicode}
> \RequirePackage[french]{babel}
> \setmonofont{Lucida Sans Typewriter}
>
> \begin{document}
> \texttt{\emph{test}}
>
> {\bfseries\texttt{\emph{test}}}
>
> \end{d
> ** Phil (a TeX programmer, who would sooner roll naked in nettles
Now that's a disturbing image...
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On Dec 2, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Adam McCollum wrote:
> Is there any way at all to "fake" these glyphs or otherwise supply them? Any
> and all suggestions welcome!
Well, yes: brute force, but it isn't pretty. (You'd probably be better off with
another typeface, unless Hoefler Text has already been
On Oct 12, 2010, at 2:54 PM, Peter Dyballa wrote:
>
> Am 12.10.2010 um 20:24 schrieb Khaled Hosny:
>
>> So \قسم, \अनुभाग, \אָפּטיילונג are fine, too?
>
> Is this really correct? I thought it should read قسم/, अनुभाग/,
> אָפּטיילונג/...
Nagari (the middle one) is read left-to-right.
---
On Oct 12, 2010, at 2:24 PM, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 07:54:26PM +0200, Keith J. Schultz wrote:
>> Personally, whether it is called \section, \abschnitt, or \ghaefjkh123
>> does not matter, as long as I can learn
>> which command name to use for getting a section.
On Sep 2, 2010, at 12:41 PM, Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
>> Yes, we are faced with the
>> awfulness of 'italic' Arabic and Syriac
>
> And Chinese, too. I've seen that once :-(
It's unfortunately rather common in some publications these days, especially
magazi
