[texhax] TeX-compatible font containing yogh?

[D. R. Evans]

D. R. Evans said the following at 04/22/2009 11:07 AM :
> I'm typesetting something in Latin Modern, but just this morning discovered
> that the LM family contains no yogh (nor even an ezh, which would do at a
> pinch -- odd that it's missing both, because otherwise it seems remarkably
> complete).
> 
> Can anyone here recommend a family that might reasonably be expected to be
> available in plain TeX-compatible format, which would be reasonably
> compatible with surrounding Latin Modern text, and which contains a yogh
> (or, if not, an ezh)?

I found cmoe at http://homepages.inf.ed.ac.uk/jcb/fonts/. The yogh there is
good enough (albeit distinctly different from the yogh used by the OUP,
which I prefer).

If anyone happens to know an answer to the original question without doing
any work, I'd still be interested in knowing of more modern fonts that
contain a yogh glyph. But don't bother going to any effort, since my
problem is sufficiently well solved now.

  Doc

-- 
Web:  http://www.sff.net/people/N7DR

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://tug.org/pipermail/texhax/attachments/20090422/646fe54f/attachment.bin