On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Wolfgang Schuster wrote:

Am 19.02.10 15:45, schrieb luigi scarso:

...

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 2:50 PM, Troy Henderson  wrote:

...

I am a LaTeX user for about 15 years, but I am very new ConTeXt.  I am having trouble using the complete set of Lucida fonts purchased from TUG.

http://www.tug.org/store/lucida/

I have followed the first set of instructions at

http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Lucida

and the fonts work great for MKII (texexec).  When building the same document (that works for MKIV) with MKIV (context), the text fonts are fine but the math fonts are set in Roman instead instead of math.   Is there an easy way to adapt the configuration file(s) for MKII to MKIV?  If this is possible but just requires a tedious process, I'm willing to do this, but I have no clue of the steps needed.

I would appreciate any advice.

Maybe simplefonts can help you http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Fonts_in_LuaTeX#With_the__simplefonts_module

\usemodule[simplefonts]

\setmainfont        [Lucida Bright] \setsansfont        [Lucida Sans] \setmonofont        [Lucida Sans Typewriter] \setmathfont        [Lucida New Math] \sethandwritingfont [Lucida Handwriting Italic] \setcalligraphicfont[Lucida Calligraphy Italic]

\starttext

\rm\tf roman \it italic \bf bold \bi bolditalic \sc smallcaps

\ss\tf roman \it italic \bf bold \bi bolditalic \sc smallcaps

\tt\tf roman \it italic \bf bold \bi bolditalic \sc smallcaps

\hw\tf roman \it italic \bf bold \bi bolditalic \sc smallcaps

\cg\tf roman \it italic \bf bold \bi bolditalic \sc smallcaps

\startformula c^2 = a^2 + b^2 \stopformula

\stoptext

Wolfgang

"Writing typescripts for \ConTeXt\ can be a tedious job, …" (from simplefonts.tex) I didn't notice … until now -- luigi

how did you set up your lucida fonts in mkiv?

First of all, I did not setup Lucida for MKIV (specifically). The following fonts come with the complete Lucida set from TUG: 46 AFM's 41 PFB's 42 PFM's 164 TFM's 63 VF's I placed all 356 of these font files into the same directory (ignoring directory structure) as well as the following three files lucida.ali lucida.map texnansi-yandy-luc.tex I simply followed these steps from http://wiki.contextgarden.net/Lucida 1) Downloaded lucida-complete.zip from TUG one year ago and extracted the files into my /usr/local/share/texmf tree. I followed the instructions located at http://www.tug.org/store/lucida/README.TUG to ensure that they worked in LaTeX (and they have for the last year) 2) I copied all files (not just the AFM and PFB as the instructions suggested) into the temporary directory (as indicated above) 3) Executed the following command: texfont --fontroot=/opt/context-minimals/tex/texmf-local --ve=yandy --co=luc --ma --in --expert 4) Downloaded and extracted the following file into /opt/context-minimals/tex/texmf-local http://dl.contextgarden.net/modules/lucida-cint.zip-0.9.zip 5) Nothing to do 6) Copied the type-luc.tex (provided by lucida-cint.zip-0.9.zip) into /opt/context-minimals/tex/texmf-local/tex/context/base 7) Copied the cont-sys.tex (located originally in /opt/context-minimals/tex/texmf-context/tex/context/base) into /opt/context-minimals/tex/texmf-local/tex/context/user and edited it adding the line \usetypescriptfile[type-luc] 8) Executed `mktexlsr` 9) and 10) Added the following code to the preface of my ConTeXt document \usetypescript[luc][texnansi] \setupformulas[method=bold] \setupbodyfont[luc,10pt] \enablemathcollection[lbr] \usemathcollection[lbr] Notice that the line \input math-lbr was omitted because it is evidently not part of my ConTeXt minimals installation (although it is in my TeX Live 2008 installation). Now, by following these steps, I am able to successfully create ConTeXt documents with Lucida fonts (with and without math) using MKII (texexec). However, using the same document with MKIV (context), the document builds fine, all text and math is Lucida, but the math fonts are upright (Roman).

On 19-2-2010 17:25, Mikael Persson wrote:

This is a bit funny, because the problem that Troy has with upright math seems to be exactly the same problem I have with mathdesign, described in the post http://archive.contextgarden.net/message/20100217.211052.21a3f6f3.en.html

depends ... as long as those fonts have the normal tex encoding

Could it be that something in math-vfu.lua (or elsewhere) is not correct? (I have played with that file, but not succeeded in getting it to work, and the lucida fonts are also handled in that file).

someone should figure what files of mathdesign make sense ... maybe the wrong one is used for math roman 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------

On 19-2-2010 19:57, Martin Schröder wrote:

2010/2/19 Hans Hagen:

...

Maybe the minimals should ship those lucida math tfm files (i don't know if there are vf files too). I'm not going to buy new lucida math fonts.

You get the new fonts for free if you already have the old ones (I must find these discs :-).

http://www.tug.org/store/lucida/yyupgrade.html

ah! thanks for noticing i actually have kept those floppies but wonder if they're still readable 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 -----------------------------------------------------------------

I've also noticed that some of the math kerning seems a little off. For example, with $y(x)$ the "y" seems to be way too close to the "(". I'm not sure how much of this is a difference in LaTeX (that I am used to) and ConTeXt's spacing and how much is due to ConTeXt+Lucida. Another example similar to this is $\sin(x)\cos(y)$. The "n" in the "sin" and the "s" in "cos" both seem a little close to the following "(". Perhaps the issue is with the "(" itself. Troy

On Sat, Feb 20, 2010 at 10:51, Hans Hagen wrote:

On 20-2-2010 5:06, Mojca Miklavec wrote:

...

I don't know how Hans' metric files look like, but: - texfont --ve=yandy ... doesn't do anything here - texfont --ve=bh ... creates a bunch of files, however *not* the T1 files which are of crucial importance to me; T1 (=ec) is only supported via virtual fonts. (And even then the character looks just about terrible, but still better than not having it at all.)

afaik originally yand only shipped texnansi metrics

\definetypescriptprefix [e:ec] [8t] \definetypescriptprefix [e:texnansi] [8y] \definetypescriptprefix [e:8r] [8r] Quite possible. Lucida doesn't provide all the ec glyphs anyway (č is not present), but the virtual font on CTAN apparently fakes it successfully by placing caron over c and taking two glyphs (successfully only in technical meaning, so that it works in the first place; typographically it's obvious that the one who did the virtual font has never used that glyph).

however, in context we have this texnansi-* naming scheme and for a while (as i used lucida often) i shipped the texnansi-* metrics

The metrics are there already, it's only that their naming scheme is weird. But unless someone really depends on raw tfm names, the following should work OK: \starttypescript [mono] [lucida] [ec,texnansi,8r] \definefontsynonym [\typescriptthree-lbtr] [hlcrt\typescriptprefix{e:\typescriptthree}] [encoding=\typescriptthree] % LucidaTypewriter \definefontsynonym [\typescriptthree-lbtb] [hlcbt\typescriptprefix{e:\typescriptthree}] [encoding=\typescriptthree] % LucidaTypewriterBold \definefontsynonym [\typescriptthree-lbto] [hlcrot\typescriptprefix{e:\typescriptthree}] [encoding=\typescriptthree] % LucidaTypewriterOblique \definefontsynonym [\typescriptthree-lbtbo] [hlcbot\typescriptprefix{e:\typescriptthree}] [encoding=\typescriptthree] % LucidaTypewriterBoldOblique \definefontsynonym [LucidaTypewriter] [\typescriptthree-lbtr] [encoding=\typescriptthree] \definefontsynonym [LucidaTypewriterBold] [\typescriptthree-lbtb] [encoding=\typescriptthree] \definefontsynonym [LucidaTypewriterOblique] [\typescriptthree-lbto] [encoding=\typescriptthree] \definefontsynonym [LucidaTypewriterBoldOblique] [\typescriptthree-lbtbo] [encoding=\typescriptthree] \loadmapfile[lucida.map] \stoptypescript If one doesn't need the texnansi-lbr synonyms, it can be done more efficiently in a single step. Alternatively we can of course ship the metrics, but assume some LaTeX user with an already working LaTeX installation of Lucida - wouldn't it be great if it worked in ConTeX out-of-the-box?

now, when yandy went out of business and tug took over, things changed and as the original tfm (math) metrics were no longer shipped we ended up in some deadlock: context supported the original fonts (present on machines of users) while tug didn't ship those 8 tfm files needed for math

But now the tfm files for math are shipped, or am I missing something? Do you mean some other math fonts? The package on CTAN has the following tfm files (and maybe some extra ones in vf that I didn't manage to check completely yet): hlcda LucidaNewMath-Arrows-Demi

so, at that point i simply gave up on lucida (i had my own texnansi-* + original math tfm files) as changing context would break existing lucida usage

interesting is that the lucida metrics (afaik) are not shipped with tex live so we cannot create a robust solution unless we ship with the minimale:

What does robust mean? One needs to buy the font anyway, so it won't work out of the box, but it would be nice if it worked out of the box with the files that TUG does ship. Metrics in TeX live don't really help without pfb files and if one installs pfb files, one may easily copy everything else along. Of course we can add the metrics to minimals (optional install), but I would prefer them to match the ones from TUG (currently they are also available on CTAN).

for mkiv (luatex):

- afm files (for mkiv) - map file (can be small one) - only some 8 math tfm files for mkiv

for mkii:

- map file - tfm files (dunno which ones) - vf files (dunno which ones)

I can double-check which ones are not needed, but we could drop at least the 8r encoding.

for mkiv i already adapted the typescripts (in beta), for mkii we need different mappings

I'll take a look. I have noticed that math-vfu does use the metric names from the latest set of fonts. Hoewere one needs to keep in mind that it's not 100% compatible encoding (the "rm" doesn't 100% correspond to the same glyphs in LM, but it's rather a roman variant of "mi", so at least the brackets need to be taken from somewhere else). Also, there are many extra glyphs all over the place that should better be mapped to unicode if one wants to use them.

...

I have fixed the typescripts, so that one doesn't need to generate any additional files apart from those present on CTAN (and we can also add them to minimals, but it might be nice to cooperate with Hans first to prevent any name clashes). I'll send the typescripts once I figure out some problems, but:

ok, alternatively we could ship the texnansi-* and ec-* variants but who cares

For me it is the less files - the less problems. If some other files are already considered "standard" and work out of the box, it would be nice to use those. (Unless someone convinces Karl to ship a few extra metrics, but you already said that he declined the idea.)

...

1.) Hans, why does      \definefontsynonym  [LucidaBright] [file:hlhr.pfb] fail with the message below? (I can send a complete example off-list.) How does one use pfb fonts then? Anyway, \definefontsynonym [LucidaBright] [name:LucidaBright] works fine, so that's ok for now. Using the accents in XeTeX would require extra tricks anyway, so concentrating on pdftex and luatex seems reasonable.

i have no clue ... but best test with the latest beta

also, i did a fix in math-vfu (extra nil check) as some shapes seem to be missing

even if it works, luatex can quit whem embedding the file (buglet) but that has been fixed by taco yesterday

I will check that (one needs to check the vectors anyway).

...

2.) When reading typescripts for mkii with mkiv ("ec" encoding that is based on virtual fonts), I don't get any accent at all, not even š and ž that are part of texnansi encoding and are present in font. Why is that?

nu clue ... maybe because yandy only bothered about texnansi so we might as well stick to that

But š and ž *are* part of font and part of texnansi encoding.

...

3.) When creating a devoted mkiv typescript, č is missing (and so are ćđ, but I can live without the two of them as long as Nino is not nearby :), however not being able to use č is a no-go for me.

again, maybe the font is not complete

i'm a little surprised as i'd suppose those virtual fonts to be ok

we can still consider to use the texnansi-* and ec-* variants (texfont generated)

The virtual font *is* ok. It is MKIV that doesn't care about that virtual font. In short: - texnansi -> is tfm; all the glyphs are present in font - ec -> is only vf; some glyphs are missing in font, but are composed in vf Is there any way to get those composed glyphs out in mkiv?

...

I'll get to math later. At the moment I had to figure out how the files are organized and how to use them without having to depend on texfont.

lucida was always different but afaik tug now ships them in default tex math encoding so the math-lbr vector is useless now

- almost default - It's quite ok for the first approximation, but still needs some fixes. If nothing else it offers way more glyphs than CM/LM. Mojca