[XeTeX] new use of alternate glyphs and how to turn them off
khaledhosny at eglug.org
Sun Oct 17 00:15:21 CEST 2010
On Sun, Oct 17, 2010 at 12:06:38AM +0200, Roland Kuhn wrote:
> With two different versions of the font the exact same behavior was seen when switching from TL2007 or TL2008 to TL2010. This definitely rules out a font issue. Furthermore, fontspec prints the specification in the log, and there is nothing in there which would select alternates. This rules out fontspec as the culprit.
Don't take what is printed in the log with great confidence, bugs exist.
> I'm curious: why do you always request that people try luatex? Is XeTeX not maintained anymore? I have no idea what luatex is, there simply was no need. Is there a reason to change that?
For this particular case, because two successive posts suggested a
change in XeTeX behaviour which I highly doubt and since I don't have
the font myself I can't but suggest what I think a strong way to rule
out engines bugs; test with a different engine. I'm not asking anyone to
switch to LuaTeX (though I consider this a desired out come), I'm only
suggesting a step in debugging this particular case.
Arabic localiser and member of Arabeyes.org team
Free font developer
More information about the XeTeX