[XeTeX] unexpected DVI command: -1

Robert Voogdgeert rvoogdgeert at kabelfoon.nl
Sat Sep 4 12:40:26 CEST 2004

Op 4-sep-04 om 10:42 heeft Jonathan Kew het volgende geschreven:

> but my work to incorporate AAT/OT font support must have broken 
> something under certain circumstances.


The exact same text (which was a copy from an original written in LaTeX 
with BBEdit and then prepared for XeLaTeX in BBEdit) with the (in 
itself harmless) paragraph that gave me some trouble yesterday, now, 
after copying an pasting it from the original anew from BBEdit to 
TeXShop in which I subsequently prepared it for XeLaTeX compiles 
without any problem... So I'm even more surprised then yesterday
The only thing different this time, is that I entered the Hebrew 
unicode text in TeXShop, not in BBEdit, though I doubt it has anything 
to do with the problem.

> There only seems to be one thing systematic about this error: it 
> happens only with the default CM/AMS fonts

This might have been the case in Bruno's file, my file though, at least 
the paragraph after which thing went wrong, didn't contain any such 
thing. (Line 500 in the file I sent you):

 >The period in which \textsc{lbh} and \textsc{qh} were used, is called 
by Polzin a ‘neo-classic’ period. Compared with the chronicler’s 
language, the language of the non-biblical Qumran literature, the books 
 >of Esther, Daniel, and Ben Sira, as closer to the language of the 
Torah. It is more archaistic, and thus more artificial. Polzin 
concludes, based on these facts, that the archaistic languages is not a 
simple >continuation of the \textsc{lbh} found in 
Chronicles\index{Chronicles}, \textsc{n}2, and Ezra. According to 
Polzin the writings of Qumran are attempts at classical hebrew which 
are betrayed by late Aramaisms, proto->mishnaic features, and 
\textsc{lbh} features.\footnote{\citet[7]{polzin76}.}

I'm wondering whether it is really only the paragraph itself that 
causes the problem, specially since after working anew on it, the file 
compiles well.

I hope I didn't confuse thing more than they already are...


More information about the XeTeX mailing list