[XeTeX] XeTeX 0.4 available

[Ross Moore]

Hi --- last time tonight!

On 22/04/2004, at 1:53 AM, Jonathan Kew wrote:

>
> On 21 Apr 2004, at 4:26 pm, Ross Moore wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Jonathan,
>>
>>
>> On 21/04/2004, at 3:17 AM, Jonathan Kew wrote:
>>
>>> * height and width keywords for \picfile and \pdffile were not 
>>> working
>>
>> Yes --- but now there is a problem with  'rotated'
>>    the box is wrong, not enclosing the image correctly:
>>

Actually, it's the image that's wrong. The box is right after all.

>
> Oops! I suppose it would be hoping for too much to suppose that I 
> could fix several bugs without breaking anything in the process. ;-)
>
> If you don't mind, I'll hold this one for a few days while I finish 
> some work on font-related issues (better font name and encoding 
> support).

Sure.
Tomorrow I'll post my  xetex.def  which implements LaTeX color,
and \includegraphics .
I'm pretty sure it's as correct as it can be, for what you
say you have implemented. It'll give others a chance to try
it out, and detect any mistakes that I'm not able to find myself.



>
>>  \picfile  doesn't work with movies, even though QuickTime runs them.
>> Is there a good reason for this ?
>
> The reason is that \picfile is based on the QuickTime Graphic Import 
> APIs, which are specifically for still images, not movies.
>
>> Can it be made to work ?
>
> I have to admit I hadn't considered embedding movies in TeX documents, 
> but perhaps it's something to investigate. I have no idea whether that 
> can be done through CoreGraphics imaging to PDF, though. In fact, I 
> don't even know if one can embed movies within PDFs at all; anyone 
> have any information about this?

It can be done with Acrobat (Pro), so yes it is possible.
Other TeX-based methods only work by embedding a link to the
movie as an external file. It would be nice to have a reliable
way of including the movie within the PDF itself, using TeX.


>
> If it is indeed possible, I think I'd implement a separate \movie (or 
> \XeTeXmovie, given the recent discussion re extension names) 
> primitive, rather than extending \picfile.

Sounds fine to me.


>
>> Thanks a bunch for this version.
>> Much is fixed, but there are still a few problems.
>
> Indeed there are--that's no surprise! I'll try to keep the problem 
> count heading down rather than up, at least. :-)


Thanks again,

	Goodnight,

		Ross

>
> Jonathan
>
> _______________________________________________
> XeTeX mailing list
> postmaster at tug.org
> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ross Moore                                         ross at maths.mq.edu.au
Mathematics Department                             office: E7A-419
Macquarie University                               tel: +61 +2 9850 8955
Sydney, Australia                                  fax: +61 +2 9850 8114
------------------------------------------------------------------------