[XeTeX] XeTeX Digest, Vol 94, Issue 8

Fri Jan 6 12:23:00 CET 2012

On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 4:30 PM,  <xetex-request at tug.org> wrote:
> Send XeTeX mailing list submissions to
>        xetex at tug.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        xetex-request at tug.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        xetex-owner at tug.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of XeTeX digest..."
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Problem with Siddhanta font (Jonathan Kew)
>   2. Re: TeXworks & XeTeX : Pinyin u-with-third-tone (Daniel Greenhoe)
>   3. Re: TeXworks & XeTeX : Pinyin u-with-third-tone (Andrew Moschou)
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Jonathan Kew <jfkthame at googlemail.com>
> To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <xetex at tug.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2012 14:52:12 +0000
> Subject: Re: [XeTeX] Problem with Siddhanta font
> On 4 Jan 2012, at 07:20, Shiva Shankar wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am using xelatex to produce the following pdf which I am attaching
>> with this mail. I am using siddhanta font typeset this verse.
>> I am also attaching tex file.
>>
>> Problem is in the word sa"sa"nkaa.h when we add the
>> long 'aa' the dot of the '"n' disappears and the 'aa'-matra is too
>> close to the previous character.
>
> You have a similar problem in the middle of the preceding word, too, just before the "ro" syllable.
>
>> Do you know how we can get this
>> to format correctly?
>
> It might be a font problem - have you tried different fonts to see if the problem persists?

This problem is not there in other fonts. I have typeset same verse in
Sanskrit2003, Nakula and Sahadeva
fonts. With these fonts it is displaying properly.

Does anyone used Siddhanta font in XeTeX?  can any one suggest which
unicode font
group members recommend for using devanagari in XeTeX.

>> --
>> Regards
>> Shivashankar
>> Sriranga Digital Software Technologies Pvt. Ltd.,
>> Srirangapatna
>> <forum.tex><forum.pdf>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
>>  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Daniel Greenhoe <dgreenhoe at gmail.com>
> To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <xetex at tug.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 04:17:11 +0800
> Subject: Re: [XeTeX] TeXworks & XeTeX : Pinyin u-with-third-tone
>>> Since you are using Antykwa fonts for the newsletter,
>>> I'm wondering whether you already considered to
>>> ask the authors to add the glyph.
>
> It would make a nice Christmas gift. However, the addition called for
> would really be an entire block of glyphs. Of course standard pinyin
> requires four tone markers: first tone (high tone), second tone
> (rising tone), third tone (low tone), and forth tone (falling tone).
> And these tone markers can appear above any of the vowels a, e, i, o,
> or u. So that requires a minimum support of 20 glyphs (4x5=20 ...
> impressed with my math???)
>
> In addition, and this may only be me, but I don't like to put a tone
> marker over the i because there is already an ominous dot hovering up
> there and I don't like making the upper space even more crowded with
> another symbol (and I don't like having the dot removed and simply
> replaced with a tone marker). So that sometimes means moving the tone
> marker to the space above a consonant, meaning at least some
> consonants glyphs with tone markers may also be good.
>
> For example, in
>  ping(2) an(1)  (generally meaning "peace")
> where a rising tone marker is needed above the "ping", I would prefer
> to put the tone marker above the "n" rather than above the "i".
>
> Dan
>
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor at rhul.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Daniel Greenhoe wrote:
>>
>>> Wouldn't a simple \v{u} render sufficient quality?
>>
>>
>> Reinhard Kotucha wrote :
>>
>>> I suppose that the idea was to use \v{u} in order to compose the
>>> glyph and am sure that you don't need LaTeX in order to achieve this.
>>
>>
>> You are both quite correct, it almost certainly would.
>> The problem is, once one starts using Unicode, one tends
>> to forget the earlier TeX methods for glyph composition,
>> and I certainly did in this case.  However, whether \v {u}
>> is really any  better than ŭ is philosophically debatable :
>> both are  kludges, and I was really looking for a cleaner solution !
>>
>>> Since you are using Antykwa fonts for the newsletter, I'm wondering
>>> whether you already considered to ask the authors to add the glyph.
>>> I suppose that the glyph is missing because they didn't know that you
>>> need it.
>>
>>
>> I hadn't considered that, mainly because I know just how
>> busy the authors are, but I suppose I might ask if they
>> could consider it in time for next year's newsletter ...
>>
>> ** Phil.
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
>>  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>
>
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Andrew Moschou <andmos at gmail.com>
> To: Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <xetex at tug.org>
> Cc:
> Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 10:25:40 +1030
> Subject: Re: [XeTeX] TeXworks & XeTeX : Pinyin u-with-third-tone
>
>
> On 5 January 2012 06:47, Daniel Greenhoe <dgreenhoe at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> Since you are using Antykwa fonts for the newsletter,
>> >> I'm wondering whether you already considered to
>> >> ask the authors to add the glyph.
>>
>> It would make a nice Christmas gift. However, the addition called for
>> would really be an entire block of glyphs. Of course standard pinyin
>> requires four tone markers: first tone (high tone), second tone
>> (rising tone), third tone (low tone), and forth tone (falling tone).
>> And these tone markers can appear above any of the vowels a, e, i, o,
>> or u. So that requires a minimum support of 20 glyphs (4x5=20 ...
>> impressed with my math???)
>
>
> Don't forget the vowel ü. My dictionary also includes the vowel ê (with the alternative spelling ei). Exceptionally, a tone can appear on the letter n, if the syllable does not contain a vowel, which, as far as I can tell applies only to the character 嗯 (which can be translated as "hmm").
>
>>
>> In addition, and this may only be me, but I don't like to put a tone
>> marker over the i because there is already an ominous dot hovering up
>> there and I don't like making the upper space even more crowded with
>> another symbol (and I don't like having the dot removed and simply
>> replaced with a tone marker).
>
>
> I'm curious, why you don't like doing this?
>
>>
>> So that sometimes means moving the tone
>> marker to the space above a consonant, meaning at least some
>> consonants glyphs with tone markers may also be good.
>>
>> For example, in
>>  ping(2) an(1)  (generally meaning "peace")
>> where a rising tone marker is needed above the "ping", I would prefer
>> to put the tone marker above the "n" rather than above the "i".
>>
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 5:50 PM, Philip TAYLOR <P.Taylor at rhul.ac.uk> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Daniel Greenhoe wrote:
>> >
>> >> Wouldn't a simple \v{u} render sufficient quality?
>> >
>> >
>> > Reinhard Kotucha wrote :
>> >
>> >> I suppose that the idea was to use \v{u} in order to compose the
>> >> glyph and am sure that you don't need LaTeX in order to achieve this.
>> >
>> >
>> > You are both quite correct, it almost certainly would.
>> > The problem is, once one starts using Unicode, one tends
>> > to forget the earlier TeX methods for glyph composition,
>> > and I certainly did in this case.  However, whether \v {u}
>> > is really any  better than ŭ is philosophically debatable :
>> > both are  kludges, and I was really looking for a cleaner solution !
>> >
>> >> Since you are using Antykwa fonts for the newsletter, I'm wondering
>> >> whether you already considered to ask the authors to add the glyph.
>> >> I suppose that the glyph is missing because they didn't know that you
>> >> need it.
>> >
>> >
>> > I hadn't considered that, mainly because I know just how
>> > busy the authors are, but I suppose I might ask if they
>> > could consider it in time for next year's newsletter ...
>> >
>> > ** Phil.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --------------------------------------------------
>> > Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
>> >  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>>
>>
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------
>> Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
>>  http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> XeTeX mailing list
> XeTeX at tug.org
> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>

-- 
Regards
Shivashankar
Sriranga Digital Software Technologies Pvt. Ltd.,
Srirangapatna