[XeTeX] Conflict between xunicode and fontspec?

[Ulrike Fischer]

Am Thu, 7 Feb 2008 17:42:15 +0100 schrieb Peter Dyballa:

> Am 07.02.2008 um 16:47 schrieb Ulrike Fischer:
> 
>> So the problem is not the input but the output encoding: the default
>> encoding eu1 from fontspec doesn't contain the necessary commands  
>> to map
>> the commands like \^{u} to the correct single glyph "ugrave".
> 
> This would explain why at sudden it fails to copy from the PDF file:  
> fontspec was changed in an unwanted and unexpected way 

I don't know if this is really your problem. Perhaps you are using some
other package which maps your input to commands lile \^{u}. As Bruno
mentioned there is xunicode which handles the \^{u} case so you should
try it. If it doesn't help: a complete minimal example and the resulting
pdf would probably help to find what's going wrong. 

> – besides  probably not so many will write with LaTeX macros but use the proper  
> characters.

How do you differ the both? A û in a normal (pdf)LaTeX file with e.g.
ansinew encoding is a "proper" character from the point of the view of
the text editor. But for pdfLaTeX it is command: \show û gives:
> û=macro:
->\^u.


> I was thinking (and I think I also experienced this) xdv2pdf and  
> xdvipdfmx were inserting a mapping from accented characters to their  
> Unicode positions, just as Vladimir Volovich's cmap packages tries to  
> handle this with pdfTeX, so that copying from the PDF file resulted  
> in fully composed Unicode strings. At least today I cannot copy  
> composed Unicode characters from any PDF file.

Does "any PDF" include arbitrary PDF's from the net? 


-- 
Ulrike Fischer