On May 27, 2012, at 7:27 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
BTW, what is the status of Pagella Math?
Nearly complete from what I hear.
Steve
___
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to
Steve Peter schrieb:
On May 27, 2012, at 7:27 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
BTW, what is the status of Pagella Math?
Nearly complete from what I hear.
it is available from CTAN:
http://CTAN.ORG/tex-archive/fonts/tex-gyre-math
Herbert
The integral sign is now big enough, but spacing between the sign and
its bounds is too large... (In the px-font.)
Cheers,
Tim
2012/5/29 Herbert Voss herbert.v...@fu-berlin.de:
Steve Peter schrieb:
On May 27, 2012, at 7:27 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
BTW, what is the status of Pagella Math?
The same is true for other mathfonts discussed in the thread Math
fonts in TeXLive 2012.
Cheers,
Tim
2012/5/29 Tim Steenvoorden tim.steenvoor...@gmail.com:
The integral sign is now big enough, but spacing between the sign and
its bounds is too large... (In the px-font.)
Cheers,
Tim
On 28-5-2012 01:27, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Mon, 28 May 2012, luigi scarso wrote:
Different, but still wrong
\unprotect
\starttypescript [\s!math] [palatinomath]
\definefontsynonym [PalatinoMath]
[\s!file:texgyrepagella-math-regular.otf]
\stoptypescript
\starttypescript [\s!math]
Still get a small integral sign in the latest beta (2012.05.26 16:40).
Times works perfectly. Am I doing something wrong here?
\definetypeface[palatino][rm][serif][palatino]
\definetypeface[palatino][mm][math][palatino]
\setupbodyfont[palatino]
\starttext
\startformula
\int_0^\infty
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Tim Steenvoorden
tim.steenvoor...@gmail.com wrote:
Still get a small integral sign in the latest beta (2012.05.26 16:40).
Times works perfectly. Am I doing something wrong here?
\definetypeface[palatino][rm][serif][palatino]
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 5:31 PM, luigi scarso luigi.sca...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Tim Steenvoorden
tim.steenvoor...@gmail.com wrote:
Still get a small integral sign in the latest beta (2012.05.26 16:40).
Times works perfectly. Am I doing something wrong here?
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 7:50 PM, luigi scarso luigi.sca...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 5:31 PM, luigi scarso luigi.sca...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, May 27, 2012 at 5:16 PM, Tim Steenvoorden
tim.steenvoor...@gmail.com wrote:
Still get a small integral sign in the latest beta
On Mon, 28 May 2012, luigi scarso wrote:
Different, but still wrong
\unprotect
\starttypescript [\s!math] [palatinomath]
\definefontsynonym [PalatinoMath] [\s!file:texgyrepagella-math-regular.otf]
\stoptypescript
\starttypescript [\s!math] [palatinomath] [\s!name]
\definefontsynonym
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 1:27 AM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
BTW, what is the status of Pagella Math? Should we default to that instead
of px-fonts?
Pagella didn't get much testing so far, it has not even been imported
into TeX Live yet and it didn't get on CTAN yet. There are some known
issues
On 25-5-2012 00:40, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
I tested with asana, hoping that opentype fonts will behave better, but
asana is hopelessly broken in the other direction: too big integrals and
sums. To fix asana, change
DisplayOperatorMinHeight = more,
to
DisplayOperatorMinHeight = 0,
fixed
{
On 25-5-2012 00:43, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
It's more complicated because tx-fonts behaves correctly.
indeed, and I always thought that these fonts were similar in setup
Hans
-
Hans Hagen
Hi all,
I'm still struggling with the same issue in 2012.05.24. Anyone?
Cheers,
Tim
2012/5/20 Tim Steenvoorden tim.steenvoor...@gmail.com:
Dear list,
Have some problems with the latest beta. I get small integral signs
when using Palatino math (see minimal example in attachment). Any
clou?
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Tim Steenvoorden
tim.steenvoor...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm still struggling with the same issue in 2012.05.24. Anyone?
Cheers,
Tim
Yes --- sorry, I can only confirm your issue.
--
luigi
On Thu, 24 May 2012, luigi scarso wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Tim Steenvoorden
tim.steenvoor...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I'm still struggling with the same issue in 2012.05.24. Anyone?
Cheers,
Tim
Yes --- sorry, I can only confirm your issue.
Any idea when this was
Sorry, can't help with that. The first ConTeXt beta I tested for
TeXLive 2012 is 2012.05.14. Before that I used 2011.05.18 from TeXLive
2011.
Tim
2012/5/24 Aditya Mahajan adit...@umich.edu:
On Thu, 24 May 2012, luigi scarso wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Tim Steenvoorden
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Any idea when this was introduced (or if this bug was always present)?
beta 2011.07.14 16:09
(https://github.com/mojca/context/commit/58e91401c966ea58ff13645addf05f8f1c506c0e
or
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Any idea when this was introduced (or if this bug was always present)?
beta 2011.07.14 16:09
Oh, I'm sorry, nonsense. That was the last working one. The one
introducing the bug was
On Fri, 25 May 2012, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Any idea when this was introduced (or if this bug was always present)?
beta 2011.07.14 16:09
Oh, I'm sorry, nonsense. That was the
On 25-5-2012 00:13, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Any idea when this was introduced (or if this bug was always present)?
beta 2011.07.14 16:09
Oh, I'm sorry, nonsense. That was the last
On Fri, 25 May 2012, Hans Hagen wrote:
On 25-5-2012 00:13, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at 3:59 PM, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
Any idea when this was introduced (or if this bug was always present)?
beta 2011.07.14 16:09
Hi Khaled,
just checking ... did the code related to display operator heights
change as part of the math cleanup?
Hans
On 25-5-2012 00:40, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Fri, 25 May 2012, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:05 AM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
On Thu, May 24, 2012 at
AFAIK, no.
The code that handles extensible delimiters changed, but IIUC
we are not talking about extensible symbol here.
Regards,
Khaled
On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 01:13:10AM +0200, Hans Hagen wrote:
Hi Khaled,
just checking ... did the code related to display operator heights
change as
24 matches
Mail list logo
