> On 2 Dec 2018, at 19:01, Hans Hagen <j.ha...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> This super/supscript stuff is a bit more tricky because when a superscript 2 
> is in the font, and a superscript 3 isn't, using a fake ^3 alongside that ^2 
> quite certainly will look bad because the 2 is normally of a different design 
> that a scaled down 2, so one then has to replace them all. Then there is the 
> question of scale and move (up/down).

This issue shows up with the STIX and STIX2 fonts, as the former has the 
superscript digits ¹ ² ³, but not the other which came to Unicode later in a 
different range.

> Although I have some experiemntal (font) magic on my computer it will 
> probably take till next year before it will show up in a beta.

I use the code below, which seems fine, as the two fonts are close to each 
other. But it seems that one cannot add [force=yes] to ensure they all come 
from the same font as on the command \definefontfallback. This command would 
otherwise be good to pick replacements for certain glyphs.

\definefallbackfamily [mainface] [serif] [stixtwotext] 
\definefallbackfamily [mainface] [mono] [stixtwotext] 
\definefallbackfamily [mainface] [math] [stixtwomath] 
\definefontfamily     [mainface] [serif] [stix]
\definefontfamily     [mainface] [mono] [stix]
\definefontfamily     [mainface] [math] [stix]

If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the 

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net

Reply via email to