# [XeTeX] fontspec v1.7

Jonathan Kew jonathan_kew at sil.org
Mon Jun 20 02:02:35 CEST 2005

On 19 Jun 2005, at 5:54 pm, Will Robertson wrote:

> On 20 Jun 2005, at 9:13 AM, Bruno Voisin wrote:
>
>
>> Accordingly, the culprits in fontspec.sty appear to be the lines:
>>
>>
>>>   \DeclareSymbolFont{operators}\zf at enc\rmdefault\mddefault\updefault
>>>   <snip>
>>>
>>
>> <snip>
>> from fontmath.ltx:
>>
>>
>>> \DeclareMathAccent{\dot}{\mathalpha}{operators}{"5F}
>>> \DeclareMathAccent{\ddot}{\mathalpha}{operators}{"7F}
>>>
>>
>> <snip>
>> Possibly a solution would be to define a new symbol font (similar
>> to "operators") just for taking the math accents from it, and use
>> cmr10 for example (or lbr).
>>
>
> Hi Bruno,
>
> Yes, it is quite clear where the problem is when the pieces are
> laid out on the table. Sorry it came down to this; your analysis is
> once again spot on and I should have sorted this out long ago.
>
> I'll soon fix fontspec & maths up once and for all, I hope!

While "fixing up" fontspec & maths may deal with this particular
issue, it bothers me that it is possible to make xdv2pdf fail like
this.... no matter what characters you ask it to draw, I would like
to think that the worst possible outcome is that you get PDFs with
missing (or unwanted) glyphs, not that it crashes. But clearly it's
not that robust at the moment.

If someone would be able to put together a minimal example that makes
it fail, without getting into fontspec and math mode and so on, that
would be really helpful. Can you crash it by just selecting a certain
font in plain TeX, and trying to render a certain character using
\char? If so, I'd love to have such a test case, to see if there's
some way to figure out why it fails and make it more reliable.

JK



More information about the XeTeX mailing list