I'm finding this thread to be quite distressing.
On 26/04/2014, at 6:45, Philip Taylor wrote:
> Wagner wrote:
>
>> XeTeX can do via xdvipdfmx specials almost everything explained in the
>> PDF reference and pdfmark reference. Will you insist to include these
>> 1000+ pages in the XeTeX manual?
Zdenek Wagner wrote:
XeTeX can do via xdvipdfmx specials almost everything explained in the
PDF reference and pdfmark reference. Will you insist to include these
1000+ pages in the XeTeX manual?
No, Zdeněk; I am asking for /important/ facts to be documented,
not the entire known universe.
A
2014-04-25 22:21 GMT+02:00 Philip Taylor :
>
>
> David Carlisle wrote:
>
> I don't see any reason to include the documentation in the xetex manual
>>
>> texdoc dvipdfmx
>>
>> provides a 5 or so page tugboat article with the details, what's to be
>> gained by copying that?
>>
>> It just duplicat
David Carlisle wrote:
I don't see any reason to include the documentation in the xetex manual
texdoc dvipdfmx
provides a 5 or so page tugboat article with the details, what's to be
gained by copying that?
It just duplicates the information and is only of interest to a
minuscule fraction o
> XeTeX My-file
..
> XeTeX &LaTeX My-LaTeX-file
Philip that's not been true for so long I'm surprised you can remember
that far back:-) all the web2c engines load formats based on their
name, there is no intrinsic difference between say pdflatex with a
preloaded latex and pdftex with a pre loaded
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
Just because you can invent a silly-looking command line to make invoking
XeLaTeX look more difficult than it is, doesn't make XeLaTeX stop being an
integrated tool chain. However, it seems unlikely that either of us will
be able to change the other's mind on t
On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, Philip Taylor wrote:
> I'm sorry, Matthew, I can only think you are confusing XeTeX with some other
> system.
Just because you can invent a silly-looking command line to make invoking
XeLaTeX look more difficult than it is, doesn't make XeLaTeX stop being an
integrated tool ch
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, Philip Taylor wrote:
I'm sorry, what has LaTeX to do with any of this ?
You don't want to hear about XeLaTeX, but you write:
(X)DVIPDFM(X). Since (X)DVIPDFM(X) is indeed an integral part of the XeTeX
tool chain, I think that documenting
On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 07:18:34PM +0930, Will Robertson wrote:
>
> Khaled, would you be able update the copy in the xetex repo?
Just send me the updated version and I’ll commit it (a git format-patch
would be even better but not necessary).
Regards,
Khaled
---
On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, Philip Taylor wrote:
> I'm sorry, what has LaTeX to do with any of this ?
You don't want to hear about XeLaTeX, but you write:
> (X)DVIPDFM(X). Since (X)DVIPDFM(X) is indeed an integral part of the XeTeX
> tool chain, I think that documenting how to access its functionality
msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote:
XeLaTeX is the integrated toolchain. If you're going to insist that XeTeX
without LaTeX must be fully documented as a separate entity, then it only
makes sense to do the same for XDVIPDFMX.
I'm sorry, what has LaTeX to do with any of this ?
Philip Taylor
-
On Apr 25, 2014, at 7:51 AM, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> 2014-04-25 13:59 GMT+02:00 :
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, Philip Taylor wrote:
> > (X)DVIPDFM(X). Since (X)DVIPDFM(X) is indeed an integral part of the XeTeX
> > tool chain, I think that documenting how to access its functionality (with
>
> XeLaTeX
2014-04-25 13:59 GMT+02:00 :
> On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, Philip Taylor wrote:
> > (X)DVIPDFM(X). Since (X)DVIPDFM(X) is indeed an integral part of the
> XeTeX
> > tool chain, I think that documenting how to access its functionality
> (with
>
> XeLaTeX is the integrated toolchain. If you're going to i
On Fri, 25 Apr 2014, Philip Taylor wrote:
> (X)DVIPDFM(X). Since (X)DVIPDFM(X) is indeed an integral part of the XeTeX
> tool chain, I think that documenting how to access its functionality (with
XeLaTeX is the integrated toolchain. If you're going to insist that XeTeX
without LaTeX must be full
Philip Taylor wrote:
Hallo both --
[long snip]
It would also (IMHO) be very helpful to document how to create
hyperlinks at the XeTeX primitive (\special) level; JK writes :
IIRC, hyperlinks are handled entirely at the pdf output driver level; there are
no xetex primitives involved. It
Hallo both --
Will Robertson wrote:
I’ve been away from LaTeX development work for a while; I’ve been known to let
primitives slip through the cracks.
Thanks for letting us know — I wouldn’t be surprised if there were some more we
overlooked.
These commands are all described in the pdfTeX ma
On 15 Apr 2014, at 9:49 am, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:58:23PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote:
>>
>> Why are these key XeTeX primitives (\XeTeXprotrudechars, \rpcode, etc)
>> not documented in /The XƎTEX reference guide/ ? Will, Khaled,
>> Jonathan : can you comment on this,
Hi Phil,
Have you ever tried
\input miniltx.tex
This then allows a subset of LaTeX structural commands and internals to be used
without the documentclass stuff — which is what I think you detest most.
Now many LaTeX packages can be loaded and used, without problems, in what are
otherwise p
OK, thank you Vafa, I will ask Thành.
** Phil.
Vafa Khalighi wrote:
If I recall correctly, Hàn Thế Thành added these primitives to XeTeX;
therefore he knows them best.
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug
If I recall correctly, Hàn Thế Thành added these primitives to XeTeX;
therefore he knows them best.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Philip Taylor wrote:
>
>
> Khaled Hosny wrote:
>
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:58:23PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Why are these key XeTeX primitives (
Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:58:23PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote:
Why are these key XeTeX primitives (\XeTeXprotrudechars, \rpcode, etc)
not documented in /The XƎTEX reference guide/ ? Will, Khaled,
Jonathan : can you comment on this, and will these (and any other
current
On Thu, Apr 10, 2014 at 12:58:23PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote:
>
> Why are these key XeTeX primitives (\XeTeXprotrudechars, \rpcode, etc)
> not documented in /The XƎTEX reference guide/ ? Will, Khaled,
> Jonathan : can you comment on this, and will these (and any other
> currently undocumented p
Robert wrote:
On 10.04.14 16:53, Philip Taylor wrote:
I would like to write :
\XeTeXprotrudechars = 2
\rpcode \fd \TeXtoUnicode `\- = 250
\rpcode \fd \TeXtoUnicode `\. = 150
does \TeXtoUnicode already exist,
Yes, it exists: "U" (as explained here:
http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2010-
On 10.04.14 16:53, Philip Taylor wrote:
Further to this thread, in a document on which I am currently
working I have to write :
\XeTeXprotrudechars = 2
\rpcode \fd /hyphen = 250
\rpcode \fd /period = 150
I would like to write :
\XeTeXprotrudechars = 2
\rpcode \fd `\- = 250
\rpcode \fd `\. =
Further to this thread, in a document on which I am currently
working I have to write :
\XeTeXprotrudechars = 2
\rpcode \fd /hyphen = 250
\rpcode \fd /period = 150
I would like to write :
\XeTeXprotrudechars = 2
\rpcode \fd `\- = 250
\rpcode \fd `\. = 150
or at worst :
\XeTeXprotrudechar
On 25/03/2014 09:03, I write (to XeTeX-Bounces, not to the correct list
address) the message below. Ross Moore kindly offered an off-list
answer, but basically that was suggesting to use the XeLaTeX interface
to the features in which I was interested and to use TeX's debugging
tools to try to asc
26 matches
Mail list logo
