From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/33055 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jonathan Kew Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: XeTeX and OpenType LM Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:16:17 +0000 Message-ID: <7E5493F1-197C-484E-92FB-7A48552BA85E@sil.org> References: <6faad9f00701302044o5172093ay9510e345dc019ce3@mail.gmail.com> <45C078E0.8080003@wxs.nl> <6faad9f00701310858q5c2792aft3774199f01a33af1@mail.gmail.com> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1170263835 30254 80.91.229.12 (31 Jan 2007 17:17:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:17:15 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mailing list for ConTeXt users To: "Mojca Miklavec" Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Wed Jan 31 18:17:00 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.88] helo=ronja.ntg.nl) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HCJ4X-0005lt-1o for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:16:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25CE015F; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:16:19 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 21551-09-5; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:16:13 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA86C147; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:16:12 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05D66147 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:16:11 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 21551-09-4 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:16:06 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from smtp1.wsfo.org (smtp1.wsfo.org [208.145.81.51]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCA9B141 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:16:05 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from mail.link77.net (mail.link77.net [172.22.0.125]) by smtp1.wsfo.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id l0VHGKrk020470 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Wed, 31 Jan 2007 12:16:20 -0500 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.54 on 172.22.0.51 X-Scanned-By: RAE MPP/Clamd http://raeinternet.com/mpp X-Scanned-By: This message was scanned by MPP Free Edition (www.messagepartners.com)! Original-Received: from [172.17.1.94] (account jonathan_kew@sil.org [172.17.1.94] verified) by mail.link77.net (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.8) with ESMTPSA id 135274060; Wed, 31 Jan 2007 12:16:19 -0500 In-Reply-To: <6faad9f00701310858q5c2792aft3774199f01a33af1@mail.gmail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.752.2) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.7 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:33055 Archived-At: On 31 Jan 2007, at 4:58 pm, Mojca Miklavec wrote: >> hm, i'm still wondering why xetex needs the extra [] ; is this >> somewhere documented? is it something new? why not {} >> >> having an extra series of defs for xetex is a bad idea, so i'd >> rather fix that 'automatically' > > Using OpenType fonts from the TeX tree has been implemented in the > second half of 2006 (I was probably among those who requested that > feature). Yes :) > The only documentation I know of are "release notes". I > guess that only Jonathan can answer your question. Normally, XeTeX loads OpenType fonts by *font name* (i.e., things like \font\x="Latin Modern Roman 10pt" or \font\y="Times New Roman", etc). It will find fonts in this way if they are "installed" in the normal desktop sense (in the c:\windows\fonts folder, or /Library/ Fonts etc under Mac OS X, or /etc/fonts or ~/.fonts under Linux, and so on). To repeat: such fonts are identified by their font names. Moreover, there is some support for font families, in that xetex looks for the appropriate optically-sized face, and can locate bold and italic variants of a base font. The square-bracket notation is quite different, in that it allows a font (anywhere on the machine) to be loaded by *file name* (not font name). The texmf tree is searched by default, but full pathnames can also be used. In this case, there is no additional font family management; xetex will simply use the font file specified. Font names and font filenames are quite different, in many cases, and it didn't seem wise to mix them up and allow the exact same form of the \font declaration to access either one. This could lead to ambiguity and confusion in the case where a filename does happen to be the same as a font name. As for why square brackets.... why not? :) We just needed a way to distinguish filenames from font names, and this seemed a reasonably safe choice -- unlikely to be present in a real font name, and not usually given special treatment in TeX. JK