[XeTeX] fontspec v1.7
Bruno Voisin
bvoisin at mac.com
Sun Jul 3 20:03:24 CEST 2005
Le 3 juil. 05 ˆ 08:47, Will Robertson a Žcrit :
> On 23 Jun 2005, at 8:46 PM, Ross Moore wrote:
>
>> On 23/06/2005, at 5:58 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
>>
>>> Will Robertson wrote:
>>>
>>>> First: do we actually want \mathrm to take the font of the text?
>>
>> Not necessarily; indeed, probably not.
>
> Indeed?
> I was basing my work on the assumption that this is what has been
> done previously (i.e., both euler.sty and lucbmath.sty define
> \mathrm as \rmdefault). I guess it all comes down to how you're mix-
> and-matching.
I tend to disagree with Ross on this, too.
>> Note that there is no math-upright (of medium weight).
>> Thus \mathrm would use ordinary characters, with their usual
>> spacing.
>> This need *not* be the normal text-font for the document
>> (e.g., use Code2000 when math is in Code2001 , say).
>> Of course \text is different from \mathrm , being really a temporary
>> escape out of math-mode, back into text-mode.
>> (Authors need to be educated to respect this distinction!)
>
> And now we come full circle back to the topic of mathrm.
> It seems reasonable to me that there is actually no such thing as
> math upright, but rather a matching text font is often used to
> label functions and to tag variables with super/subscripts.
There is math upright in some fonts (Lucida Expert, for example). I
use them for getting upright ¹, e and i, in particular, based on the
requirements of some journals which want upright letters for all math
constants.
>
> Since for now we don't have a way to properly use unicode maths
> fonts, I'm going to stick by the convention of using the default
> text fonts for the default math `text' fonts, but I'll add a
> package option to either turn it on or off (haven't decided yet).
>
> I can't really see what the next step needs to be to get to be able
> to typeset maths with a unicode maths font.
I think nothing proper will come out before Unicode math fonts are
released. Using virtual fonts with XeTeX being out of the question,
the solution could come from the Mathematica fonts, or from the STIX
fonts, now announced for the end of this year <http://
www.stixfonts.org/>. But that would also require fundamental changes
in TeX, which seems even more firmly grounded in 8- (or even 7-) bit
world for maths than for text. Or could this come from ConTeXt?
Bruno Voisin
More information about the XeTeX
mailing list