[XeTeX] Strange Euler Script font behaviour
bvoisin at mac.com
Fri Nov 19 17:29:39 CET 2004
Le 19 nov. 04, à 17:06, William F. Adams a écrit :
> I think we can forego backward compatibility for expediency. After
> all, very few of these legacy documents are in Unicode now, no?
I'm not sure that's a good idea. After all, most of the requests
Jonathan has had on this list, after word about XeTeX started to spread
on the OS X TeX list and people began to experiment with XeTeX, were
requests for compatibility with LaTeX documents. And a fair number of
the functions that were added since were motivated by these requests,
like ":mapping=tex-text" or Ross' utf8accents.sty.
I generally disagree with Microsoft, but one of the things they say,
which I think is really true, is that the slowness of the evolution of
their software is partly the consequence of the huge installed base
they have to deal with, and the compatibility they must ensure (unless
they deliberately decide to break it, of course, like with Word). I
really think compatibility with standard (La)TeX is a prerequisite for
wide XeTeX adoption.
One thing I think would be useful (no hurry, though) is documentation
of the process Jonathan used for converting the PFB CM/AMS fonts to
OTF, so that motivated users may start experimenting with converting
their fonts for XeTeX use. But then there are these darn licensing
issues, which I hope apply only to a restricted number of fonts. And
they can't apply in any case to Fourier fonts, for example.
Enough for today, have a nice WE,
More information about the XeTeX