[XeTeX] No underdot in Adobe Garamond Pro?

[Rembrandt Wolpert]

xunicode seems to work (for me anyway) in that particular (Adobe Garamond
Pro) case, though.

as ever,
Rembrandt


On Wed, May 6, 2009 at 09:14, Ulrike Fischer <news3 at nililand.de> wrote:

> Am Wed, 6 May 2009 16:13:51 +0530 schrieb Shrisha Rao:
>
> > Greetz.
> >
> > For some reason, the usual \d{} command of LaTeX produces an erroneous
> > symbol when used with the Adobe Garamond Pro font.  The plain (non-
> > Adobe) Garamond screws up even the overlines.  Latin Modern Roman
> > shows both perfectly (as do Computer Modern, Palatino, and the
> > classical LaTeX fonts).  Attached is an example showing this problem.
> > Any suggestions welcome.  TIA.
>
> That's a known problem. xunicode declares a certain definition for
> \d (and other accents commands) which can fail if the font doesn't
> contain the necessary glyph(s). See e.g. the following discussion
> from january:
>
> http://tug.org/mailman/htdig/xetex/2009-January/011701.html
>
>
> --
> Ulrike Fischer
>
> _______________________________________________
> XeTeX mailing list
> postmaster at tug.org
> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>



-- 
人有不為也而後可有為
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/attachments/20090506/e6535b46/attachment.html