ec encoding and tcaron
Dear friends, I apologize that I ask the same question that had been asked a year ago but I can't find in the archive the definite solution. I want to use new fonts in the ConTeXt to typeset the Czech documents. TeXFont seems to be the best way to prepare metrics. EC encoding seems to be the standard ConTeXt encoding. But it doesn't include tcaron (well, this is true at least for EC.enc on my teTeX 3.0 under the SuSE Linux 10.0 with the latest ConTeXt from May 28). (In the Czech the lower case of Tcaron looks like tqouteright but nowadays most AFM files call it tcaron). Other glyphs may miss as well (I might not notice since I suspect that ConTeXt replaces missing letter with composites, e.g. Ecaron with \v{E}). So, what is the standard way I should use? I can use ec-lm.enc but is it the right way? (Moreover, it seems there is no information for ligatures.) I could try to use il2, but is the right way? And I had some problems with xl2.enc used formerly for il2-encoded fonts. So, what was decided to be the right encoding for the ConTeXt? (Is the answer the same for the Czech typesetters?) And one more question: Does anybody have the enc file that would make the TeXFont to generate metrics for il2-encoded fonts for the use with csplain (the Czech version of plainTeX)? Sincerely yours Michal Kvasnicka
Hello Michal, I'm sure the EC encoding contains the 'tcaron' character (see the lm-ec.enc file for example). I have ConTeXt on top of TeXLive 2005. I can find: texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/base/ec.enc texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/lm/ec-lm.enc texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/lm/lm-ec.enc I use EC normally for typesetting Czech documents. So I would suggest to use EC ;-) -Richard _____ From: Michal Kvasnicka [mailto:quasar@econ.muni.cz] To: mailing list for ConTeXt users [mailto:ntg-context@ntg.nl] Sent: Fri, 09 Jun 2006 12:11:11 +0200 Subject: [NTG-context] ec encoding and tcaron Dear friends, I apologize that I ask the same question that had been asked a year ago but I can't find in the archive the definite solution. I want to use new fonts in the ConTeXt to typeset the Czech documents. TeXFont seems to be the best way to prepare metrics. EC encoding seems to be the standard ConTeXt encoding. But it doesn't include tcaron (well, this is true at least for EC.enc on my teTeX 3.0 under the SuSE Linux 10.0 with the latest ConTeXt from May 28). (In the Czech the lower case of Tcaron looks like tqouteright but nowadays most AFM files call it tcaron). Other glyphs may miss as well (I might not notice since I suspect that ConTeXt replaces missing letter with composites, e.g. Ecaron with \v{E}). So, what is the standard way I should use? I can use ec-lm.enc but is it the right way? (Moreover, it seems there is no information for ligatures.) I could try to use il2, but is the right way? And I had some problems with xl2.enc used formerly for il2-encoded fonts. So, what was decided to be the right encoding for the ConTeXt? (Is the answer the same for the Czech typesetters?) And one more question: Does anybody have the enc file that would make the TeXFont to generate metrics for il2-encoded fonts for the use with csplain (the Czech version of plainTeX)? Sincerely yours Michal Kvasnicka _______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Hi Richard.
I'm sure the EC encoding contains the 'tcaron' character (see the lm-ec.enc file for example). I have ConTeXt on top of TeXLive 2005. I can find: texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/base/ec.enc texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/lm/ec-lm.enc texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/lm/lm-ec.enc
I use EC normally for typesetting Czech documents. So I would suggest to use EC ;-) I'm sorry you're not right. The lm-ec.enc really includes tcaron, but neither ec.enc nor EC.enc does, at least at my teTeX 3.0. If you use only LatinModern, it works, because lm-ec.enc is used. But I doubt it works well for other fonts. Does it? I was unsuccessful. Can you send me your ec.enc file please?
Yours Michal Kvasnicka P.S. It's nice to hear that more Czech use the ConTeXt.
Michal Kvasnicka wrote:
Hi Richard.
I'm sure the EC encoding contains the 'tcaron' character (see the lm-ec.enc file for example). I have ConTeXt on top of TeXLive 2005. I can find: texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/base/ec.enc texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/lm/ec-lm.enc texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/lm/lm-ec.enc
I use EC normally for typesetting Czech documents. So I would suggest to use EC ;-) I'm sorry you're not right. The lm-ec.enc really includes tcaron, but neither ec.enc nor EC.enc does, at least at my teTeX 3.0. If you use
I believe this bug was fixed more then a year ago. The names of ec-lm and lm-ec was changed during a time a year ago. teTeX 3.0 has not changed since last year since it is dead. Vit
only LatinModern, it works, because lm-ec.enc is used. But I doubt it works well for other fonts. Does it? I was unsuccessful. Can you send me your ec.enc file please?
Yours Michal Kvasnicka
P.S. It's nice to hear that more Czech use the ConTeXt.
On 6/9/06, Michal Kvasnicka wrote:
Hi Richard.
I'm sure the EC encoding contains the 'tcaron' character (see the lm-ec.enc file for example). I have ConTeXt on top of TeXLive 2005. I can find: texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/base/ec.enc texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/lm/ec-lm.enc texmf/fonts/enc/dvips/lm/lm-ec.enc
I use EC normally for typesetting Czech documents. So I would suggest to use EC ;-) I'm sorry you're not right. The lm-ec.enc really includes tcaron, but neither ec.enc nor EC.enc does, at least at my teTeX 3.0. If you use only LatinModern, it works, because lm-ec.enc is used. But I doubt it works well for other fonts. Does it? I was unsuccessful. Can you send me your ec.enc file please?
Approximately a year ago there was a discussion on tex-fonts mailing list about fixing ec.enc (for example there's a glyph called "dbar", which is agains any standards: in Unicode it's called "d with stroke" and according to Adobe standards it should be called "dcroat"; and many more inconsistencies). The result of the discussion was something like: "No, we may not change this since it may break functionality of some fonts which used that standard years ago. Googling for this and that reveales that some fonts still use those old glyph names ..." (perhaps Google found 4 hits or so ...) The explanation/excuse was that everyone using modern glyph names should create his own "ec.enc" (just as it was done for Latin Modern). I would recommend you to use lm-ec.enc or tex256.ec ("fixed" version of ec.enc which should be present in the same folder as ec.enc). The Polish guys did their best to follow the standards, so the ec file of Latin Modern should be OK for most fonts. If some glyph is still missing, you can manually change the encoding definition (and then note that specific encoding in map file as well, in the same was as it's done for LM). You can test the resulting font with \showfont[yourfontname] % where yourfountname should preferrably be ec-something In that way you'll spot any missing glyphs pretty easily. About xl2.enc: it is incomplete and neiter supported by ConTeXt (it could be, but there's no real benefit) nor by most popular fonts (you have to create metrics and everything by yourself, so your files might be highly unportable). I dropped the idea about using it pretty soon. It's not impossible to use it, but probably not worth it. Mojca
participants (4)
-
Michal Kvasnicka -
Mojca Miklavec -
Richard Gabriel -
Vit Zyka