Simon Pepping (spepping@scaprea.hobby.nl) wrote:
\definecharacter dmacron 158 \definecharacter Eth 208
Eth is actually not a correct one, ie. it doesn't describe Dstroke.
These seem to be other names for dstroke and Dstroke. If you use an ec-encoded font and you say this:
\definecharacter dstroke 158 \definecharacter Dstroke 208
would that help?
I "solved" the problem by putting the following in enco-def.tex: \definecharacter Dstroke {\DJ} \definecharacter dstroke {\dj} However I'm not sure whether it's a correct solution. It works with cmr font, but I have to see what will happen with the properly filled Unicode font which has glyphs for dstroke & Dstroke. Now, the interesting thing is that for amacron & Amacron I get black boxes, although it looks that everything should be OK (provided that other accents in Croatian characters are properly built) since in enco-def.tex it is written: \definecharacter Amacron {\buildtextaccent\textmacron A} \definecharacter amacron {\buildtextaccent\textmacron a} and it implies that everything should be OK. Anyway, I'm going in further exploration of ConTeXt and font/encoding stuff. (I'm doing everything with DocBookInConTeXt module and utf-8 encoding DocBook file(s), hoping to get perfect tuning for DocBook processing.) Sincerely, Gour -- Gour gour@mail.inet.hr Registered Linux User #278493