Mojca Miklavec wrote:
What about \neq and \[l]dots? How can I get those working in "unicode math input"?
In general, it is better not to do that, (because it is slower and needs lots of control sequences), but if the font does not contain what you need, you have no choice, of course.
\definemathcharacter [≠] {\neq} is probably not adapted to such definitions.
You are right, it is not. But the currently ignored command \definemathcharacter [≠] [\neq] could be made to work easily enough. Here is an example of such an approach (the implementation is very ugly, I am just trying to demonstrate: \let\mydodefinemathcharacter\dodefinemathcharacter \def\dodefinemathcharacter[#1][#2][#3][#4][#5][#6]% {\iffourthargument \mydodefinemathcharacter[#1][#2][#3][#4][#5][#6]% \else \begingroup \catcode`#1=\active \uccode`~=`#1 \uppercase{\gdef~{#2}}% \endgroup \mathcode`#1="8000 \fi} Best wishes, Taco