[XeTeX] Problem with Polyglossia's \aemph command

Vafa Khalighi vafakhlgh at gmail.com
Sun Sep 19 05:59:35 CEST 2010


>
> Thanks, Vafa, bidi has changed so quickly that I had an old version left
> on my local tree that I'd overlooked. As soon as that was deleted,
> everything worked fine. Reminder to self: clean up TeX tree more often.
>
>
>
There is also a new version  coming out sometimes before the next year in
which we have a change of license as follow:

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

 Copyright © 2009–2010  Vafa Khalighi <vafakhlgh at gmail.com>

 It may be distributed and/or modified under the LaTeX Project Public
License,
 version 1.3c or higher (your choice). The latest version of
 this license is at: http://www.latex-project.org/lppl.txt

 This work is “author-maintained” (as per LPPL maintenance status)
 by Vafa Khalighi.

 In addition to the terms of LPPL any distributed version
 (unchanged or modified) of bidi has to keep the statement
 about the moral obligation for using bidi. In case of major
 changes where this would not be appropriate the author of the
 changed version should contact the copyright holder.

 Moral obligation for using bidi:
 ____________________________________

 Users of bidi who wish to include or use bidi or a modified
 version in a proprietary and commercially market product are asked
 under certain conditions (see below) for the payment of a license
 fee.  The size of this fee is to be determined, in each instance,
 by the commercial user, depending on his/her judgment of the value of
 bidi for his/her product.

 The conditions for this are as follows:

 The producer of a proprietary and commercially market product
 that involves typesetting using bidi is asked to determine
 the value of a license fee for using bidi if

    - the product is a document and the producer has decided to
      include bidi to typeset (parts of) the document or has
      directed the author of the document to include bidi (for
      example, by providing a class file to be used by the author)

    - the product is a LaTeX class or package that includes bidi

 There is no moral obligation in case

    - the product is a document but producer has not directed
      the author to include bidi (in that case the moral obligation
      lies with the author of the document)

    - the product does not involve typesetting, e.g., consists, for
      example, of distributing bidi and its documentation.

    - the product is not proprietary, i.e., is made available as free
      software itself (which doesn't prohibit its commercial marketing)

    - bidi is used for non-commercial purposes

 Determinating a license fee might result in a license fee of zero
 (i.e., no payment) in case a producer has determined that the use
 of bidi has no enhancing effect on the product. This is a
 plausible scenario, i.e., in the above two cases the producer is
 only asked to evaluate the value of bidi for the product
 not for the payment of a license fee per se (which might or might
 not follow from this evaluation).

  The license fee, if any, can be payed to the author of
  the program who can be contacted at

      vafakhlgh at gmail.com

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

-- 
به نام خداوند جان و خرد          کزین برتر اندیشه برنگذرد
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/attachments/20100919/1d8b7c57/attachment.html>


More information about the XeTeX mailing list