[XeTeX] Hoefler italics and diacritics oddity
Ross Moore
ross at maths.mq.edu.au
Tue Jun 22 01:49:19 CEST 2004
Hi Jonathan,
On 22/06/2004, at 8:21 AM, Jonathan Kew wrote:
> However, you may still find that you get line-final swashes in places
> you don't want them, such as before a word marked with your
> "transliterated" macro, as the commands you're inserting will still
> have the effect of breaking text runs that are handed to ATSUI for
> rendering. But at least it won't be happening mid-word.
Can I presume from this that words entered in the source such as:
f\"ur
where the \"u expands in macros to a Unicode glyph ^^^^????
(whatever the number is)
is treated by XeTeX as a single word ?
Put another way, is it true that ...
1. XeTeX handles the token stream *after* macro expansions?
2. This is done by replacing TeX's paragraph formatting structures,
i.e. line- and page-breaking algorithms.
I cannot see how it could be otherwise, but please confirm this.
Of course, what this means is that with the LaTeX encoding-based method
of handling accents, as I described in an earlier message, then it is
possible to get searchable Unicode output of words containing accents
and (Unicode-supported) diacritics, using just the old-style 7-bit LaTeX
input source files.
(This is something that has been requested, if I recall correctly.)
Presumably alternate forms of accented characters are also possible
--- provided the font supports it.
> Whether the end result is appropriate, or whether you're better off
> disabling the line-edge swashes altogether, is for you to judge when
> you see how it looks.
>
> Jonathan
>
>>
>> On 22 Jun 2004, at 00:40, Jonathan Kew wrote:
>>
>>> The \d macro ends up breaking up the text into separate runs, and so
>>> you get line-final swash forms (and potentially line-initial swashes
>>> afterwards). You can disable these by adding "Smart Swashes=!Line
>>> Final Swashes,!Line Initial Swashes" to the font definition.
Are dot-under letters directly supported in Unicode ?
(Maybe just some of them, not all.)
Or will these diacritics always break-up words, due to
the box-constructions otherwise required to produce them ?
>>>
>>> Of course, you might *want* the smart swashes; in the appropriate
>>> places, they look good. But if you have lots of macros or other
>>> special items breaking up your lines of text, they'll appear in all
>>> sorts of unwanted places, and you're better off disabling them.
>>>
>>> HTH,
Cheers,
Ross
------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
------------------------------------------------------------------------
More information about the XeTeX
mailing list