Re: [NTG-context] Kerning between primes and left parenthesis (again)

31 Jul 2017

      On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 9:15 PM, Hans Hagen  wrote:
...
On 7/31/2017 8:02 PM, Mikael P. Sundqvist wrote:
...
On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Hans Hagen  wrote:
...
On 7/31/2017 11:21 AM, Mikael P. Sundqvist wrote:
...
On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 2:53 PM, Hans Hagen  wrote:
...
On 7/20/2017 7:18 AM, Mikael P. Sundqvist wrote:
...
Den 12 juli 2017 10:17 fm skrev "Mikael P. Sundqvist"
mailto:mickep@gmail.com>:
Dear Hans,
now, in luatex 1.05, that the primes are "constructed" in new
manner,
      I wonder if there is a way to specify in a goodie file the
kerning
      between characters, in particular primes and the left
parenthesis?
I tried
kernpairs = {
                  [0x2032] = {[0x0028] = -1000, }, -- prime and (
               },
but that does not seem to have any effect.
The pre-1.05 modification
dimensions = {
                   default = {
                       [0x2044] = { xoffset = 275, width = 600 },
                       [0x2032] = { xoffset = 50, width = 290 }, --
prime
                       [0x2033] = { xoffset = 50, width = 690 }, --
double
      prime
                       [0x2034] = { xoffset = 50, width = 1090}, --
triple
      prime
                       [0x2057] = { xoffset = 50, width = 1490}, --
      quadruple prime
               },
           },
(which is a non-optimal way of solving this issue since it has
side
      effects) does not change anything anymore.
So, is there now a way to do this cleanly now that the mechanism
is
      changed?
/Mikael
Hi,
should I interpret the silence that this is currently not possible, or
that you, Hans, is completely fed up with this subject? :-)
you rule out the possibility that i have other things to do
anyway, use
0xFE932
etc instead as primes get remapped
-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                            Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
                Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
         tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry
to
the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl /
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
I'm sorry but I cannot get it to work.
%%% my local lucida-opentype-math.lfg, located in the same directory
as the tex file (and loaded)
----- kern_250 = { bottomright = { { kern = -250 } }, force = true }
local function FixRadicalDisplayStyleVerticalGap(value,target,original)
      local o = original.mathparameters.RadicalVerticalGap -- 50
      return 2 * o * target.parameters.factor
end
return {
      name = "lucida-opentype-math",
      version = "1.00",
      comment = "Goodies that complement lucida opentype.",
      author = "Hans Hagen",
      copyright = "ConTeXt development team",
      mathematics = {
          parameters = {
              RadicalDisplayStyleVerticalGap =
FixRadicalDisplayStyleVerticalGap,
          },
          kernpairs = {
             [0x1D44E] = {[0x1D44F] = 1000,}, -- 𝑎𝑏 demo
             [0xFE932] = {[0x0028] = 1000,} -- remapped prime and (
          },
}
}
%%%
%%% the tex file
\setupbodyfont[lucidaot]
\setupmathematics[kernpairs=yes]
\starttext
$f'(x)ab$
\stoptext
%%%
The result is attached. It works ok for the pair ab, but not for prime
and (. Is the ( also remapped (while greping for it in the source, I
could not find any clue).
Maybe it is better to ping the maintainers of the font?
just change the dimensions
dimensions = {
             default = { -- experimental values
                 [0x2044] = { xoffset = 275, width = 600 },
              -- [0x2032] = { yoffset = -10 },
[0xFE932] = { width = 200 },
[0xFE933] = { width = 500 },
[0xFE934] = { width = 800 },
             },
         },
-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                           Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
               Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
        tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to
the Wiki!
maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl /
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
webpage  : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://context.aanhet.net
archive  : https://bitbucket.org/phg/context-mirror/commits/
wiki     : http://contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Hans,
thank you, that solution worked well! May I suggest to add something like
dimensions = {
             default = {
               [0xFE932] = { width = 150 }, -- prime
               [0xFE933] = { width = 435 }, -- double prime
               [0xFE934] = { width = 720 }, -- triple prime
               [0xFE957] = { width = 1005 }, -- quadruple prime
             },
         },
(or the values 200, 500, 800, 1100 if you prefer) to the font goodie
file for lucida in the distribution?
too narrow might clash with superscripts .. did you do more tests than the (
?
there are also reverse primes
Hans
-----------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
              Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
       tel: 038 477 53 69 | www.pragma-ade.nl | www.pragma-pod.nl
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Well, I think your values look better for (f') but mine for f'(x).
Compare the two attached files. I have browsed my ~270 pages math
document, but so far I only see either primes alone or primes with (
after, and both look OK to me.

I don't know how reverse primes are supposed to look or to be used, so
there I am of no help.

/Mikael