[Tugindia] Devnag package

[S. venkataraman]

Dear Paul,
What happens in devnag package is that you
create a file with .dn extension, run it through a
preprocessor(an executable file)
 to generate a .tex file.  Then, you
run it through latex to get the dvi file.

I have stopped using this method for quite some time
now. I use
Xelatex instead. In this case, you don't need to
use the preprocessor.  It directly produces
dvi output.  I recommend that you also use it.

You can find a file called xetex-misspaal.tex in
you texlive tree.   It is in 2013/texlive/texmf-dist/doc/generic/velthuis
in my texlive tree. Just adapt it your needs.  If you don't have gargi
font, download any unicode compliant font and use it.
You can get a few good ones from
http://biharvidhanparishad.gov.in/HindiFonts.htm.
Yogesh is good and it has regular, bold and italic
variants.  If you want use it change the line
that specifies the font to

\setmainfont[Script=Devanagari,Mapping=velthuis]{CDAC-GISTYogesh}

You are ready to go! No need for preprocessor, Xelatex directly

outputs pdf instead of going through dvi->ps->pdf.

NOTE: I am linux user, so I don't know how things work in

Mac, things like making the fonts known to Xetex. If

you are running TeXshop, there should be an option there

for running xelatex on a file.

Best,



On Sun, Aug 11, 2013 at 7:25 PM, Paul Thomas <paulfthomas at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am new to LaTeX, and I am trying to write in Devanagari with it.  I have
> the "devnag" package, and when I use it, Devanagari script comes out, but
> not correctly.
>
> I think there is something I am missing in my setup, because I noticed in
> the .tex file of the manual to the Devanagari package that the author
> actually didn't use the standard roman transliteration style to output
> Devanagari script.  In other words, in the manual it tells you how to write
> the Devanagari using the relatively straightforward scheme developed by
> Velthuis, but in the actual TeX code of the manual the author uses
> something different!
>
> Now, when I copy the passages written in the .tex file of the manual that
> output Devanagari, it comes out clear.  So, when I use the scheme that I'm
> meant to be using, and write:
>
> {\devnag dharmak.setre kuruk.setre\\ samavetaa yuyutsava.h\\ maamakaa.h
> paa.n.davaa"scaiva kimakurvata sa.mjaya}
>
> I get a jumble of Devanagari characters which in part resembles what I
> wanted to see.  However, when I copied what was actually in the .tex file
> of the manual to produce the same verse:
>
> {\dn Dm\0\322w\?/\? \7{k}z\322w\?/\? smv\?tA \7{y}\7{y}(sv,.\\
> mAmkA, pA\317wXvA\396w\4v Ekm\7{k}v\0t s\2jy..\par}
>
> Then it comes out right.
>
> It seems there is some kind of file that I haven't put in the right place
> or something along those lines.
>
> I am using a Mac.  Also, I am new to LaTeX as well as to the hands-on style
> of dealing with the computer, so please be very clear and basic.  I am
> learning how to use commands in the Terminal program, etc., and don't know
> a lot of the concepts and language.
>
> Does anyone know what I should do?
>
> Another subsidiary question: Why does the author of the manual use this
> other incomprehensible scheme to get the Devanagari output for his manual,
> and not the straightforward Velthuis scheme?
>
> Thank you,
>
> Paul
> _______________________________________________
> Home:        http://www.tug.org.in/
> TeX FAQ:     http://www.tex.ac.uk/faq
> unsubscribe: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/tugindia
>



-- 
Dr. S. Venkataraman
Associate Professor in Mathematics
School of Sciences
IGNOU