[XeTeX] when one needs more than XeTeX+OT fonts? (was: Text output garbled..)

Kārlis Repsons karlis.repsons at gmail.com
Fri Apr 15 13:03:52 CEST 2011

On Friday 15 April 2011 10:22:32 Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
> > This far I used only xelatex and was quite happy with what it can
> > produce, so I got curious: what is that pdftex, dvi, ps stuff all for,
> > when there is xelatex, and pdf viewers are the most common choice?
>   Er... because XeTeX was created much later than the formers?  Your
> question as such doesn't make sense; it could be rephrased as "Why
> haven't they disappeared?", and to that the answer is easy: because it
> would do much more harm than good.  There is no reason to willingly
> break compatibility when keeping the earlier programmes costs (almost)
> nothing -- especially true for free software.
> > Likewise (and in relation) -- why are Type1 fonts typically needed? Do
> > they have any considerable advantage in printed works?
>   Same answer.  And you should be aware that the Type 1 format was one
> of the foundations of OpenType; if it hadn't existed in the past,
> OpenType simply wouldn't exist as it is today.

I didn't intend asking anyone to remove compatibility. Just looking from the 
current perspective and trying to understand why, according to Philip, I drive 
a VW Beetle... That is, what would be the most important, which some others 
would miss?
(I promise, won't ask much more about that, it's just for a start if I decide 
there's anywhere to go with it /for me/!)
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/attachments/20110415/5072a37b/attachment.bin>

More information about the XeTeX mailing list