On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 10:20:14AM +0100, Hans Hagen wrote:
Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 12:35:28AM +0100, Taco Hoekwater wrote:
Khaled Hosny wrote: See the last comment on http://tracker.luatex.org/view.php?id=286
From the ticket: "The result is now still too wide, but that is truly cambria's fault: the integrals have large italic corrections while in fact they fit in their bounding boxes."
This isn't Cambria's fault per se, as any font that is to be used with MS Office as well is going Cambria's route (so does Asana Math and my two math fonts.) So, IMHO this should be the default behaviour for new math fonts, and old TeX fonts pretending to be new math fonts should compensate for this, not the other way around.
well, as long as there is no standard saying "for integral glyphs (of any size) you need to subtract the italic correction from the width" we cannot say that this is "expected behaviour"
Literally speaking, there is no standard at all, just an unofficial spec document, so things are a bit stretched, and again office implantation is the de facto standard here until there is an official published standard that one can point to (even then, people are likely to follow what MS implantation does and we will need to adapt to it.) Regards, Khaled -- Khaled Hosny Arabic localiser and member of Arabeyes.org team Free font developer