[XeTeX] XeTeX Digest, Vol 32, Issue 6

Ralf Stubner ralf.stubner at physik.uni-erlangen.de
Wed Nov 8 09:29:38 CET 2006

Gour <list at atmarama.org> writes:
> On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 07:43 +1030, Will Robertson wrote:
>> No, they don't.
>> At present in fontspec and xunicode, you can only typeset characters  
>> that you have actual glyphs for in the font. It appears that the  
>> combining marks required in Latin Modern don't exist, which surprises  
>> me a little.
> Me too.

Why? While Latin Modern has many glyphs, there are still large (latin
based) ranges of Unicode that are not covered. I would simply use a font
that does include proper glyphs for these Unicode positions. Gentium or
Charis SIL come to mind, which IMO look nicer than LM anyway.

> p.s. Was I supposed to change Subject of the message or this list does
> not like hijacking?

IMO it is best to post e new message with a new subject when starting a
completly unrelated discussion. Replying to an existing message makes it
harder for the various clients to keep the threads together.


More information about the XeTeX mailing list