On 23 Dec 2008, at 04:26, Yue Wang wrote:
Hi, all.
I expect different output in xetex and luatex using context. and I
think the problem is quite serious although I do not speak Turkish.
in turkish, fi can not be treat as ligatures and I can see luatex
handle that quite well. however, in xetex,
On 17 Apr 2008, at 1:09 am, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:42 AM, Jonathan Kew wrote:
On 16 Apr 2008, at 7:56 pm, Norbert Preining wrote:
Given that there won't be TL2008 in lenny, I think it would be very
desirable to update xetex to a more recent version than 0.996
On 17 Apr 2008, at 7:23 am, Norbert Preining wrote:
On Do, 17 Apr 2008, Will Robertson wrote:
Sorry, I didn't know how you went about actually creating this
package.
The packages are created from the actual TeX Live release, or better
from the security branch of the subversion repository,
On 16 Apr 2008, at 7:56 pm, Norbert Preining wrote:
Jonathan, Will: It is about TeX Live 2007 in Debian/lenny. There
will be
no TL2008 in lenny. But we have recent context and recent luatex.
It is about updating the lmodern fonts, currently we have 1.01x, the
last before the otf and font
On 10 Mar 2008, at 1:50 pm, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
Mojca Miklavec wrote:
Hello,
I just wanted to let you know that XeTeX now supports both faking
bold
and slanted (and the binaries on the garden minimals have that
feature
already).
On 1 Feb 2007, at 1:51 pm, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
If you have someone to blame, please blame me. I asked Hans if he
could add an additional switch -output-driver=xdvipdfmx when running
XeTeX. This means that the files are now converted to pdf with
xdvipdfmx instead of xdv2pdf. Without that
On 31 Jan 2007, at 4:58 pm, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
hm, i'm still wondering why xetex needs the extra [] ; is this
somewhere documented? is it something new? why not {}
having an extra series of defs for xetex is a bad idea, so i'd
rather fix that 'automatically'
Using OpenType fonts
On 13 Jun 2006, at 8:25 am, Hans Hagen wrote:
On a more general level, if both ConTeXt and XeTeX are engaged in
converting legacy TeX hyphenation patterns to utf-8, should they be
coordinated in order to avoid duplication of effort?
anyone can use the patterns; of course bugs need to be
