Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

> > Three related issues were filed in the fontspec bug tracker, one of which > has been closed: > > https://github.com/wspr/fontspec/issues/97 > https://github.com/wspr/fontspec/issues/98 > https://github.com/wspr/fontspec/issues/99 > Thanks, Jean-François

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, jfbu wrote: > in http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020099.html > (and also in one earlier post) in the thread pointed out by Ulrike, > Matthew Skala commented on a WordSpace issue with fontspec. > > Has this issue been fixed since in fontspec ? Three related issues

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

Hi Le 25 janv. 2017 à 11:13, Zdenek Wagner a écrit : > It seems equally clear to me that the fault cannot lie in the fontspec > package, > since it can be demonstrated with a pure XeTeX example as Jean-François > has shewn ... Whether the fault lies in the XeTeX

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

Le 25 janv. 2017 à 10:50, Ulrike Fischer a écrit : >> > > There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around > here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html Hi, [somewhat peripheral question] in

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

2017-01-25 15:17 GMT+01:00 : > On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, Philip Taylor wrote: > > msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > > > Using XeTeX without fontspec is a relatively unusual case > > I respectfully disagree. I use exclusively XeTeX and never fontspec. I > am certain that I

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, Philip Taylor wrote: > msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > > Using XeTeX without fontspec is a relatively unusual case > I respectfully disagree. I use exclusively XeTeX and never fontspec. I am > certain that I am not alone in this. That's why I said "relatively unusual"

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

msk...@ansuz.sooke.bc.ca wrote: > Using XeTeX without fontspec is a relatively unusual case I respectfully disagree. I use exclusively XeTeX and never fontspec. I am certain that I am not alone in this. Philip Taylor -- Subscriptions, Archive,

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

> Using XeTeX without fontspec is a relatively unusual case and it's > unsurprising there hasn't been a lot of time spent on testing that. The > engine and package go together. It may become slightly less unusual after this week's latex release as now latex defaults to TU (Unicode) encoding with

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

On Wed, 25 Jan 2017, Ulrike Fischer wrote: > There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around > here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html > It is unclear if it is engine bug and imho no one ever added > something to the issue tracker. That was a long,

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

Philip Taylor wrote: > To answer my own question : "yes" (assuming that "1" = "true") : > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > In which case I feel that it might safely be argued that there is a deficiency in the XeTeX handling of Opentype monospaced fonts,

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

Philip Taylor wrote: > > But do we know whether the font in question sets "isFixedPitch" true ? > To answer my own question : "yes" (assuming that "1" = "true") : -- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information,

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

Ulrike Fischer wrote: > > Actually I found an old discussion which seems to imply that xetex > calculates the fontdimens starting from the width a space -- and > doesn't care about monospace or not: > > https://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2006-June/004236.html But do we know whether the font in

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

For latex at least I think the thing to do is amend tulmtt.fd in base so that it has \DeclareFontFamily{TU}{lmtt}{% \hyphenchar \font\m@ne \fontdimen3\font\z@%<< \fontdimen4\font\z@%<< } with the two extra lines ensuring that these two font dimens are set to 0. (If you try this with a latex

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

Am Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:07:34 + schrieb Philip Taylor: > Whether the fault lies in the XeTeX engine or in the font is moot, Well imho it is a difference if a font set this values and xetex simply reads them in or if the font doesn't set this values and xetex guesses (faulty) defaults.

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

2017-01-25 11:07 GMT+01:00 Philip Taylor : > Ulrike Fischer wrote: > > There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around > > here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html > > It is unclear if it is engine bug and imho no one ever added > >

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

Ulrike Fischer wrote: > There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around > here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html > It is unclear if it is engine bug and imho no one ever added > something to the issue tracker. Matthew concluded by writing : It seems clear

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

Am Tue, 24 Jan 2017 19:20:21 +0100 schrieb jfbu: > xetex: 5.25pt 2.625pt 1.75pt There was once a long discussion about this xetex problem around here http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/2011-February/020072.html It is unclear if it is engine bug and imho no one ever added something to the issue

Re: [XeTeX] why does Latin Modern Mono have some stretch and shrink with XeTeX ?

Hi all, I'm not able to check this minute, but I wonder if lmmono is being "special-cases" by luaotfload -- would explain the results you're seeing. In fontspec if you load it with \setmonofont the stretch and shrink should be forced to zero, but I can agree it would be good to get to the