On 2-3-2010 14:49, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
What's pretty important is to fill the char-def.lua as well (maybe together with some additional comments that the glyph names come from the LaTeX package from Lucida, just that we'll know where the names come from next time when we see some clashes).
hm, but for me name compatibility with every latex math package is no objective; i'd rather that we're unicode math compiant (and i don't care too much what route latex follows)
Out of the whole vector only some 5-10% of glyphs works now.
is it that bad? interesting is that lucida was one of the first fonts context supported so the transition from yandy->tug has really messed up things then
A very nice check would be
for every slot in lbr-ma - print out unicode point - print out unicode description - print out mathname and mathclass - draw the glyph - draw the same glyph from cambria for comparison
(I need to learn how to do that though, but it would be a nice homework.)
well, we can forget about symbols that are in lucida but not in unicode ... it makes no sense to add all kind of symbols that only exist in one font Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------