Differences for \Vert in mkii and mkiv
Dear Aditya, dear Hans, I noticed a serious difference between what one gets for \left\Vert in mkii and in mkiv. Probably this is due to the fact that in mkiv the glyph for \Vert is constructed in a different manner, but as far as I know from what I see in the mathematical printed materials, the correct one, or the expected one, is the output from mkii. I join two small PDF files obtained with the typesetting of the following minimal example: %%% begin testVert.tex \let\=\Vert \starttext Look at the differences between mkii output and that with mkiv: \startformula \left\Vert\int_0^1 G(\cdot,s)ds\right \_{L^q} \lesssim \G\_{L^p}. \stopformula \stoptext %%% end testVert.tex Is there a way to redefine locally \Vert (or \) so that in mkiv one gets the same output as with mkii? Thanks in advance: OK
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011, Otared Kavian wrote:
Dear Aditya, dear Hans,
I noticed a serious difference between what one gets for \left\Vert in mkii and in mkiv. Probably this is due to the fact that in mkiv the glyph for \Vert is constructed in a different manner, but as far as I know from what I see in the mathematical printed materials, the correct one, or the expected one, is the output from mkii.
I don't know why the glyphs are different. In MkIV, the virtual font is mapping 0x2016 to 0xFF605, but I don't know how FF605 is created.
Is there a way to redefine locally \Vert (or \) so that in mkiv one gets the same output as with mkii?
Not locally. You could change mathvfu.lua to change the mapping, but I don't completely understand how those work (with the virtual glyphs like FF605) Aditya
Dear Aditya, I am sorry I overlooked you answer… I just saw that you have answered my message regarding the \Vert symbol. Thank you and please pardon me. I tried to modify the mapping of 0x2016 to 0xFF605, but since I don't understand the way or where 0xFF605 is constructed, I didn't get any result. 0x2016 is described in chardef.lua, and in fontagl.lua. FF605 is referred to only in mathvfu.lua. Maybe if Hans has a little time, he can explain where the double vertical bar is constructed: the problem is that these bars are scaled swelled (or English) rules rather than bars as in Latin Modern. Since more and more people are going to use only mkiv, this issue can be annoying for mathematical typesetting. Best regards: OK On 19 janv. 2011, at 17:44, Aditya Mahajan wrote:
On Tue, 18 Jan 2011, Otared Kavian wrote:
Dear Aditya, dear Hans,
I noticed a serious difference between what one gets for \left\Vert in mkii and in mkiv. Probably this is due to the fact that in mkiv the glyph for \Vert is constructed in a different manner, but as far as I know from what I see in the mathematical printed materials, the correct one, or the expected one, is the output from mkii.
I don't know why the glyphs are different. In MkIV, the virtual font is mapping 0x2016 to 0xFF605, but I don't know how FF605 is created.
Is there a way to redefine locally \Vert (or \) so that in mkiv one gets the same output as with mkii?
Not locally. You could change mathvfu.lua to change the mapping, but I don't completely understand how those work (with the virtual glyphs like FF605)
Aditya ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!
maillist : ntgcontext@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntgcontext webpage : http://www.pragmaade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________
participants (2)

Aditya Mahajan

Otared Kavian