[XeTeX] Arabic ligatures
musaf at runbox.com
Wed Jul 7 00:12:55 CEST 2004
On 6 Jul 2004, at 10:06, Jonathan Kew wrote:
> On 5 Jul 2004, at 11:49 pm, Musa Furber wrote:
>> In this bug, that font is not alone....
>>> I'll file a bug report with Apple re Al Bayan, but obviously it'll
>>> take some time before a fixed version appears.
>> ...and perhaps Apple will take more note since other fonts share the
>>> Meanwhile, I suppose you could insert a zero-width non-joiner
>>> between the alef and lam, to prevent the ligature formation; but it
>>> will prevent getting the special ligature for "Allah". And you don't
>>> really want to clutter your text like that. Better to use a
>>> different font. Does Baghdad look any better than Geeza to you? Or
>>> how about DecoType Naskh, if you have it; I'm not sure which systems
>>> that shipped with.
>> ...like Badghdad and DecoType Naskh.
> I'm not seeing the same behavior with those fonts....
>> Too bad, too, since the Baghdad and Naskh fonts looks better. Or
>> should I say "font"? I have them both and they look identical.
> ... nor do they look identical.
> What versions of these fonts do you have? FontBook can show you the
> versions, as well as where the fonts are installed, if you hover over
> them in the list. I wonder if perhaps you have older versions; though
> even that doesn't explain why they'd look identical. Something isn't
> right there.
Today the fonts look different. Must have been fatigue induced operator
incompetence. They do look different, and the strange ligature appear
in Al Bayan, not the others.
I tried DecoType Naskh on a 20 page Arabic text that is fully vowelled.
One thing that struck me is that the vowel placement was distracting.
More information about the XeTeX