TeX Euro Currency Symbol
Frank
Anyone have a quick and dirty tex solution for the "Euro" currency
symbol?????
--
Frank
Magnus Bäck
"Frank" <fbac...@i-dial.de> wrote:
> I am lazy by nature :-)
Sigh.
> Anyone have a quick and dirty tex solution for the "Euro" currency
> symbol?????
http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?label=euro
--
Magnus Bäck | CS/CE student, Lund Institute of Technology
ba...@swipnet.se | http://www.jpl.se/~magnus/english.html
wald
question ?
ALWAYS check the UK TeX faq first. But since you're lazy by nature:
http://www.tex.ac.uk/cgi-bin/texfaq2html?keyword=&question=161
Greetz, Wald
"Frank" <fbac...@i-dial.de> wrote in message
news:a0v9um$9bf$1...@news.space.net...
Peter Flynn
Why would you want a quick and dirty one when there have been
nice clean ones available for the last two years?
///Peter
Ralf Fassel
| >Why would you want a quick and dirty one when there have been
| >nice clean ones available for the last two years?
|
| 'textcomp' then doing '\texteuro'.
According to the FAQ, `The design of the symbol in the TC fonts is not
universally loved...' Nice said.
<rant>
Reading the FAQ page, I'm getting more and more annoyed by these
ramifications about lousy symbol design and what else, and all you
have to do is [3MB of advice follow], when all I want is to tap that
cute little key labelled AltGr-E and have a Euro-Symbol show up in my
Text. I don't *beep-censored* care whether my text is in Times and
the Euro-Symbol in sans-something. Just print it!
</rant>
Is there really no `officical' way yet to have character \200 (ASCII
128) (which my keyboard produces for AltGr-E) to yield the Euro-symbol
(just like the Umlauts)?
R', do I feel better now? Not really...
Robin Fairbairns
>* drsquare <now...@nowhere.co.uk>
>| >Why would you want a quick and dirty one when there have been
>| >nice clean ones available for the last two years?
>|
>| Nice clean ones? The only one I've come accross is by using
>| 'textcomp' then doing '\texteuro'.
>
>According to the FAQ, `The design of the symbol in the TC fonts is not
>universally loved...' Nice said.
>
><rant>
></rant>
sigh. i don't know why i bother. i try to represent facts as i see
them, and people don't like it.
>Is there really no `officical' way yet to have character \200 (ASCII
>128)
don't be daft, that's not ascii: ascii is a 7-bit code.
>(which my keyboard produces for AltGr-E) to yield the Euro-symbol
>(just like the Umlauts)?
get your keyboard to emit iso latin-9 (for which there's an inputenc
definition, or get the inputenc definition for whatever code you
keyboard emits to include this character. fwiw, my windoze boxes (one
nt, one w2k) emit \'e when given altgr-e; since i've only a rather
vague concept of what character code they use, i'm completely at a
loss as to what character code yours is using.
--
Robin Fairbairns, Cambridge -- rf10 at cam dot ac dot uk
Ralf Fassel
| ><rant>
| ></rant>
| sigh. i don't know why i bother. i try to represent facts as i see
| them, and people don't like it.
Robin,
thanks for bothering in the first place.
I read your contributions in this group and find them very helpful.
I read the FAQ and it's helpful most of the times.
Discussing the shape of the Euro-Symbol and why the Comission should
have done a better job at top of the document to answer the question
`Typesetting the euro sign' is at least strategically unwise in my
eyes. It's the type of thing I don't want to discuss when I need a
job to get done.
I am not a typesetting professional, and I don't want to have to
explain why I use a (adjectives omitted) Euro Symbol from the TC1 font
series, and not the `official' shape.
So I took the time to read all the euro* packages, and finally, after
half a days work, I have my Sans-Serif-Euro-Symbol. Don't tell this
to my boss or some Windozer.
| >(ASCII 128)
|
| don't be daft, that's not ascii: ascii is a 7-bit code.
Bad-Monday-Morning-Mode on my side (yes I know its thursday).
| get your keyboard to emit iso latin-9 (for which there's an inputenc
| definition, or get the inputenc definition for whatever code you
| keyboard emits to include this character.
My `new' german keyboard (has the Euro symbol at the `E' keycap),
produces character octal 200 (128 decimal). I don't know how to
change this (to what?) and not break Internet Explorer or the tea
timer on those boxen, so I'd rather hack the encoding into my .sty
file. It seems that
\DeclareInputText{128}{\euro}
together with the eurofont package (tweaked to always produce the
sans-serif versions) does the trick.
R'
Sven Utcke
> Ralf Fassel <ral...@gmx.de> wrote:
> >According to the FAQ, `The design of the symbol in the TC fonts is not
> >universally loved...' Nice said.
> >
> ><rant>
> >Reading the FAQ page, I'm getting more and more annoyed [...]
> ></rant>
>
> sigh. i don't know why i bother. i try to represent facts as i see
> them, and people don't like it.
I don't think the problem is with your representation of the facts,
but rather with the facts as such --- which, of course, are reasonably
far out of your controll. People just want to write \euro and be done
with it (or even better, use the corresponding key on their
keyboard(*)), and quite naturally find it annoying that
a) they have to load extra packages (due to the nature of LaTeX2e).
b) the symbol looks appalling, due to an unfortunate mixture of
complete incompetence on the side of the designers who created the
original symbol, and a regretable tendency of the TeX crowd to try
and improve on it...
Nothing you could help one way or the other (well, I suppose you
could, if you had a lot of time to spare...)
The same probably goes for most other symbols.
Sven
(*) But to give a word of warning here: I recently dug out a copy of
some compilation of different formulas we once wrote during our
time at university. Basically a very usefull thing, but it
unfortunately makes heavy use of characters aboce 127, and nobody
has a clue what character-set exactly was used (some DOS thingy),
so I haven't been able to recode it yet...
--
_ __ The Cognitive Systems Group
| |/ /___ __ _ ___ University of Hamburg
| ' </ _ \/ _` (_-< phone: +49 (0)40 42883-2576 Vogt-Koelln-Strasse 30
|_|\_\___/\__, /__/ fax : +49 (0)40 42883-2572 D-22527 Hamburg
|___/ http://kogs-www.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/~utcke/home.html
Udo Zallmann
<vd0advv...@kogs12.informatik.uni-hamburg.de> scripsit:
> (*) But to give a word of warning here: I recently dug out a copy of
> some compilation of different formulas we once wrote during our
> time at university. Basically a very usefull thing, but it
> unfortunately makes heavy use of characters aboce 127, and
> nobody has a clue what character-set exactly was used (some DOS
> thingy), so I haven't been able to recode it yet...
Either cp437 or cp850 should work, if you are talking about those
math and graphical symbols that can be printed by text printers.
udo
--
This page is best viewed with your monitor switched on.
Udo Zallmann
<ygau1u3...@jupiter.akutech-local.de> scripsit:
> My `new' german keyboard (has the Euro symbol at the `E' keycap),
> produces character octal 200 (128 decimal).
A Windows thing. 0200 (0x80) is supposed to be the non-breakable
space ( in HTML). M$ put the Euro symbol there. If the
inputenc package supports codepage 1252 this is what you want to use.
David Kastrup
> Ralf Fassel <ral...@gmx.de> in
> <ygau1u3...@jupiter.akutech-local.de> scripsit:
>
> > My `new' german keyboard (has the Euro symbol at the `E' keycap),
> > produces character octal 200 (128 decimal).
>
> A Windows thing. 0200 (0x80) is supposed to be the non-breakable
> space ( in HTML). M$ put the Euro symbol there. If the
> inputenc package supports codepage 1252 this is what you want to use.
Last time I looked, the non-breakable space in ISO encodings was at
0xa0, octal 240.
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
Email: David....@t-online.de
Ralf Fassel
| People just want to write \euro and be done with it (or even better,
| use the corresponding key on their keyboard(*)),
Yes. When I started with TeX way back in 1988, it was ok to write \"a
to get an Umlaut. 14 years later I don't think this is still
appropriate, and indeed it has changed some years ago and I can use
inputenc with latin1. I would have expected the same for the Euro
symbol, or at least some wording why it can't be done in that fashion
(ambigous encoding of the symbol in different environments etc).
| and quite naturally find it annoying that
| a) they have to load extra packages (due to the nature of LaTeX2e).
Not quite. I would really not mind for some extra
\usepackage{this-and-that}, but in order to install and configure
those packages I sometimes need a PhD in computer science.
Eg `eurofont' looked quite promising to me at first. I had it and the
prerequisites up and running in < 15 Minutes including download time.
Didn't work. Crappy^WThe version from the EC fonts came out. Ok,
scan the docs. 60+ pages. Ouch. 60+ pages for `how to typeset the
euro symbol'? Excuse me. Well, today I had the time, so I did not
immediately say `use Word'.
Sentences in the docs like `put these files in an appropriate place in
your TeX directory tree' leave me a bit helpless facing the TDS.
*Where* is the appropriate place? (Or, `where is my TDS?' to begin
with...) Does it matter? Dump it all in one place?
In order to install a new font, you `only' need some basic
understanding of the TDS, the NFSS, Metafont, virtual fonts, font
naming schemes, etc etc etc. If you want to convert to PDF,
additional reading is required. Duh. Once you've grokked this all,
two years are gone, and some new scheme has arrived behind your back
while you were reading the docs. Better, bigger, and of course more
useful to typeset the Euro-Symbol in Martian texts from left to right
on the low quality paper available up there, with the paper surface
ripples already taken into account in the Metafont sources. `Great'
stuff.
In contrast to that the euro.tar package comes with a neat install.sh,
which does most of the job, a tiny eurosans.sty, which works `as-is'.
_Good_ stuff, but somewhat hard to find!
| b) the symbol looks appalling, due to an unfortunate mixture of
| complete incompetence on the side of the designers who created the
| original symbol,
If *I* compare the `orginal' Euro Symbol and the EC font version, I
have a clear favourite, and this is not the EC font version and it is
not because the `original' is the less worse alternative.
| and a regretable tendency of the TeX crowd to try and improve on
| it... The same probably goes for most other symbols.
I don't mind anybody making suggestions for improvements. But *if*
there is an `official' symbol, why not provide the official symbol as
a default in a straight forward way, and make the alternatives
available via options or somesuch?
And yes, TeX is not my favourite waste of time any longer. I'm just
sticking to it because I know it to some degree.
R'
Ralf Fassel
| > A Windows thing. 0200 (0x80) is supposed to be the non-breakable
| > space ( in HTML).
|
| 0xa0, octal 240.
This is where all the TeX *.def files have it, too (decimal 160).
latin1.def:
\DeclareInputText{160}{\nobreakspace}
Is there any `official' position for the Euro Symbol in say a latin1
encoding (yet)? Im my X11 screen font (lucida typewriter), 0200-0237
look untaken, the rest is already occupied by printing characters.
R'
Udo Zallmann
<x5pu4rf...@tupik.goethe.zz> scripsit:
> Last time I looked, the non-breakable space in ISO encodings was at
> 0xa0, octal 240.
Oops, my mistake. Sorry if I have caused any confusion.
Robin Fairbairns
>* David Kastrup <David....@t-online.de>
>| > A Windows thing. 0200 (0x80) is supposed to be the non-breakable
>| > space ( in HTML).
>|
>| Last time I looked, the non-breakable space in ISO encodings was at
>| 0xa0, octal 240.
>
>This is where all the TeX *.def files have it, too (decimal 160).
>latin1.def:
> \DeclareInputText{160}{\nobreakspace}
gasp. latex gets it right.
>Is there any `official' position for the Euro Symbol in say a latin1
>encoding (yet)?
"a" latin1 encoding represents something of a confusion. "latin1" is
a reference to iso 8859-1, which specifies a character set. perhaps
you're thinking of latin9 (which corresponds to i know not which part
of iso 8859), for which there _is_ a latex input encoding, with
\DeclareInputText{164}{\texteuro} (replacing the sputnik "currency
symbol" in latin1). latin9 also provides one or two other things
useful in western europe, at the cost of some icelandic characters.
> Im my X11 screen font (lucida typewriter), 0200-0237
>look untaken, the rest is already occupied by printing characters.
iso 8-bit fonts don't put anything in 0-31 mod 128, so while they may
"look" available, they're actually not.
Peter Flynn
> Nice clean ones? The only one I've come accross is by using 'textcomp' then
> doing '\texteuro'.
I actually rather like that one. Better than the boring old standard
one. You should read my article of two years ago on the various Euro
symbols available (in TUGboat: I don't have the reference here as I'm
out of the office right now).
Of course, you could just search CTAN for "euro"...
///Peter
Peter Flynn
> * drsquare <now...@nowhere.co.uk>
> | >Why would you want a quick and dirty one when there have been
> | >nice clean ones available for the last two years?
> |
> | Nice clean ones? The only one I've come accross is by using
> | 'textcomp' then doing '\texteuro'.
>
> According to the FAQ, `The design of the symbol in the TC fonts is not
> universally loved...' Nice said.
>
> <rant>
> Reading the FAQ page, I'm getting more and more annoyed by these
> ramifications about lousy symbol design and what else, and all you
> have to do is [3MB of advice follow], when all I want is to tap that
> cute little key labelled AltGr-E and have a Euro-Symbol show up in my
> Text. I don't *beep-censored* care whether my text is in Times and
> the Euro-Symbol in sans-something. Just print it!
> </rant>
If you don't care how it looks, why are you using LaTeX?
Just use a wordprocessor instead...
> Is there really no `officical' way yet to have character \200 (ASCII
> 128) (which my keyboard produces for AltGr-E) to yield the Euro-symbol
> (just like the Umlauts)?
Because decimal 128 is not ASCII (ASCII stops at 127). The Unicode
location of the Euro is clear from the standard XML character entity
value <!ENTITY euro "€">. To put it on a keyboard means either
sacrificing something else, or rejigging the scan codes to produce EUR.
> R', do I feel better now? Not really...
Keep taking the pills :-)
///Peter
Ralf Fassel
| > \DeclareInputText{160}{\nobreakspace}
| gasp. latex gets it right.
More often than not... ;-)
| "a" latin1 encoding represents something of a confusion. "latin1"
| is a reference to iso 8859-1, which specifies a character set.
| perhaps you're thinking of latin9 (which corresponds to i know not
| which part of iso 8859), for which there _is_ a latex input
| encoding, with
Hmm, most probably I was referring to a latex input encoding. The
`latin1' you use in \usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}.
As for the latin9 <-> ISO mapping, quoting inputenc.dtx:
% The ISO~Latin-9 encoding file defines the characters in the
% ISO~8859-15 encoding. It was contributed by Karsten Tinnefeld
% (\texttt{kar...@xxxxxxxxx.xxx}).
% It differs only a small amount from ISO~Latin-1 and is a
% replacement for it that contains a few characters that are
% needed for French and Finnish. Further, a slot for the Euro
% currency sign has been added and this could be the killer
% argument for many 8-bit texts to be written in Latin-9 in the
% future.
I admit that I have no clue of the deeper wisdom in encodings,
character sets, glyphs and so on. I learned to use
\usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
in a more or less monkey-see-monkey-do manner, and it worked to
typeset my 8-bit texts. Thanks for the pointer to latin9 anyway.
| iso 8-bit fonts don't put anything in 0-31 mod 128, so while they
| may "look" available, they're actually not.
Yup. Is there a specific reason for >=128? 0-31 are the usual
controls, but what are 128ff reserved for?
R'
Ralf Fassel
| You can write \euro. Just stick this in your preamble:
|
| \usepackage{textcomp}
| \newcommand{\euro}{{\sf \texteuro}}
Reading the accompaying docs to the eurofont packages, it looks to me
as if loading textcomp breaks some accent stuff when using PostScript
fonts (haven't checked for myself though).
% One possibly unwanted effect of loading \packname{textcomp} is
% that tie accents are typically messed up if you're using \PS
% Type 1 founts; the \optname{fixtieaccent} option can help out
% with this.
So while I may now have a font-o-typographically well designed Euro
symbol, I might run into trouble at other places, a behaviour which I
am used to with other systems, not TeX.
R'
Robin Fairbairns
>* r...@pallas.cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
>| iso 8-bit fonts don't put anything in 0-31 mod 128, so while they
>| may "look" available, they're actually not.
>
>Yup. Is there a specific reason for >=128? 0-31 are the usual
>controls, but what are 128ff reserved for?
other sorts of controls, iirc (things you would say ESC-<char> for in
a 7-bit font).
however, the <c> bit of <iirc> could well be a bit tattered -- it's a
long time since i held any conversation with JTC1/SC2 people ... and
back in those days, they were mostly the completely mad[*] backwater
of the standards community. the group's shown startling signs of good
sense since -- iso 10646 (aka unicode) has appeared since i was a
standardiser.
[*] as opposed to just plain mad, which described the rest of us.
Giuseppe Bilotta
> | "a" latin1 encoding represents something of a confusion. "latin1"
> | is a reference to iso 8859-1, which specifies a character set.
> | perhaps you're thinking of latin9 (which corresponds to i know not
> | which part of iso 8859), for which there _is_ a latex input
> | encoding, with
>
> Hmm, most probably I was referring to a latex input encoding. The
> `latin1' you use in \usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}.
>
> As for the latin9 <-> ISO mapping, quoting inputenc.dtx:
>
> % The ISO~Latin-9 encoding file defines the characters in the
> % ISO~8859-15 encoding.
[snip]
Why the heck don't they call it latin15?
--
Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
Axiom I of the Giuseppe Bilotta
theory of IT:
Anything is better than MS
Giuseppe Bilotta
>
> However, this doesn't solve the problem
> of the symbol being completely terrible looking, and having an even more
> terrible name.
It sounds better in Italian than in English, I must say. (Do you
prefer ECU)
As for the design ...
Robin Fairbairns
>Ralf Fassel wrote:
>> | "a" latin1 encoding represents something of a confusion. "latin1"
>> | is a reference to iso 8859-1, which specifies a character set.
>> | perhaps you're thinking of latin9 (which corresponds to i know not
>> | which part of iso 8859), for which there _is_ a latex input
>> | encoding, with
>>
>> Hmm, most probably I was referring to a latex input encoding. The
>> `latin1' you use in \usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}.
>>
>> As for the latin9 <-> ISO mapping, quoting inputenc.dtx:
>>
>> % The ISO~Latin-9 encoding file defines the characters in the
>> % ISO~8859-15 encoding.
>
>[snip]
>
>Why the heck don't they call it latin15?
we _are_ talking iso/iec jtc1/sc2 here.
not all iso 8859 parts define latin alphabets (indeed, not all of them
have even actually been defined).
there are, between iso/iec 8859-1 and iso/iec 8859-15 inclusive, 9
latin alphabet encodings.
-5 is "latin-cyrillic", -6 "latin-arabic", and -8 "latin-hebrew"
latin-arabic i've always boggled at: it contains a sort of iso646 in
the bottom 128 characters, and then crams a small sample of arabic
characters into the upper 128. i had understood that there were more
than 256 arabic characters (not that i've ever studied arabic at all,
fascinating language though it looks).
Giuseppe Bilotta
> >> Hmm, most probably I was referring to a latex input encoding. The
> >> `latin1' you use in \usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}.
> >>
> >> As for the latin9 <-> ISO mapping, quoting inputenc.dtx:
> >>
> >> % The ISO~Latin-9 encoding file defines the characters in the
> >> % ISO~8859-15 encoding.
> >
> >[snip]
> >
> >Why the heck don't they call it latin15?
>
> we _are_ talking iso/iec jtc1/sc2 here.
>
> not all iso 8859 parts define latin alphabets (indeed, not all of them
> have even actually been defined).
>
> there are, between iso/iec 8859-1 and iso/iec 8859-15 inclusive, 9
> latin alphabet encodings.
[snip]
I still don't see why LaTeX should use the name latin9 for the map
relative to ISO Latin-15.
Robin Fairbairns
>Robin Fairbairns wrote:
>> >Why the heck don't they call it latin15?
>>
>> we _are_ talking iso/iec jtc1/sc2 here.
>>
>> not all iso 8859 parts define latin alphabets (indeed, not all of them
>> have even actually been defined).
>>
>> there are, between iso/iec 8859-1 and iso/iec 8859-15 inclusive, 9
>> latin alphabet encodings.
>
>[snip]
>
>I still don't see why LaTeX should use the name latin9 for the map
>relative to ISO Latin-15.
iso/iec 8859-15's title is 8-bit ... character set ... latin alphabet
number 9.
hence latin-9: it's not latex, it's iso/iec jtc1/sc2[*], like i said.
[*] well, formally it's jtc1 that makes the recommendation to iso
central secretariat, but while it's not entirely unheard of that
some country should block a standard at the tc level, it's never
happened to any standard even peripherally approaching any work that
i've been involved with.
Anselm Lingnau
> I still don't see why LaTeX should use the name latin9 for the map
> relative to ISO Latin-15.
Because the encoding in question is called »ISO 8859-15« or »ISO
Latin-9«, *not* »ISO Latin-15«. The official name of ISO Latin-1
happens to be ISO 8859-1, and so on through ISO Latin-4, but ISO
8859-5 is called »ISO Latin/Cyrillic«. ISO 8859-9 is ISO Latin-5, ISO
8859-11 is Thai, and ISO 8859-13 (for Baltic Rim languages) is ISO
Latin-7.
I suppose mortals like us don't have to understand this, but there we
are.
Anselm
--
Anselm Lingnau .......................................... ans...@strathspey.org
On Usenet, everybody can behave just the way they like. This is both attractive
and aggravating. -- Cornelius Krasel
Giuseppe Bilotta
> >I still don't see why LaTeX should use the name latin9 for the map
> >relative to ISO Latin-15.
>
> iso/iec 8859-15's title is 8-bit ... character set ... latin alphabet
> number 9.
>
> hence latin-9: it's not latex, it's iso/iec jtc1/sc2[*], like i said.
>
> [*] well, formally it's jtc1 that makes the recommendation to iso
> central secretariat, but while it's not entirely unheard of that
> some country should block a standard at the tc level, it's never
> happened to any standard even peripherally approaching any work that
> i've been involved with.
Sorry for being so dense (and thanks to Anselm Lingau as well)
Uwe Brauer
> In contrast to that the euro.tar package comes with a neat install.sh,
> which does most of the job, a tiny eurosans.sty, which works `as-is'.
> _Good_ stuff, but somewhat hard to find!
Can you please tell me where you found this package euro.tar??
Thanks
Uwe Brauer
Heiko Oberdiek
wrote:
CTAN:fonts/euro/
Some ftp servers can generate archives on the fly, eg:
ftp://ftp.dante.de/tex-archive/fonts/euro.tar (or .zip, ...)
Yours sincerely
Heiko <ober...@uni-freiburg.de>
Alan G Isaac
> "a" latin1 encoding represents something of a confusion. "latin1" is
> a reference to iso 8859-1, which specifies a character set.
Doesn't a character set have an implied ``natural'' encoding?
Is it improper to refer to this? (Real question. Any any useful URLs
for learning the basics will be appreciated.)
Alan Isaac
Robin Fairbairns
"character sets" (in iso/iec jtc1/sc2 terms) are effectively the same
things that are codified as "input encodings" in latex.
(la)tex font encodings are rather different beasts, since they contain
things that aren't in a character set (such as ligatures). (iso
10646, aka unicode, seems to confuse this issue. i'm not sure how far
one may go with it, along the ligature sort of line.)
there probably are documents on the web for these sorts of things, but
my involvement with standards predates the www and i just don't know
the urls. instead, i sport a hair shirt, and read the standards
themselves.
Rudy Gevaert
> Some ftp servers can generate archives on the fly, eg:
> ftp://ftp.dante.de/tex-archive/fonts/euro.tar (or .zip, ...)
> Yours sincerely
> Heiko <ober...@uni-freiburg.de>
Hello,
I downloaded te tar file; and edited install.sh (used wget instead of
ncftp).
And that worked ok.
But what is there left to do? Do I have to follow the other readme files
in the subdirs?
Thanks in advance,
--
Rudy Gevaert - ru...@zeus.rug.ac.be - http://www.webworm.org
- keyserverID=24DC49C6 - http://www.zeus.rug.ac.be
It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a
correct one.
Simon Dales
>
> I am lazy by nature :-)
>
> Anyone have a quick and dirty tex solution for the "Euro" currency
> symbol?????
>
\def\Euro{{\sf C\kern-.75em\raise.1em\hbox{=}}}
Not approved, but a quick hack.
The "=" is too long, and not slanted.
--
Simon Dales, Publication Software Engineer
"The impossible is easy"
Nuffield Press Ltd., 21 Nuffield Way, Abingdon, Oxford, OX14 1RL,UK
+44-1235-558637
Uwe Brauer
> * r...@pallas.cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns)
> | > \DeclareInputText{160}{\nobreakspace}
> | gasp. latex gets it right.
>
> More often than not... ;-)
>
> | "a" latin1 encoding represents something of a confusion. "latin1"
> | is a reference to iso 8859-1, which specifies a character set.
> | perhaps you're thinking of latin9 (which corresponds to i know not
> | which part of iso 8859), for which there _is_ a latex input
> | encoding, with
>
> Hmm, most probably I was referring to a latex input encoding. The
> `latin1' you use in \usepackage[latin1]{inputenc}.
>
> As for the latin9 <-> ISO mapping, quoting inputenc.dtx:
>
Hi
The following works for me:
\usepackage[latin9]{inputenc}
\newcommand{\textcurrency}{\euro}
\usepackage{marvosym}
\newcommand{\euro}{{\EUR}}
But I would find it more logical to skip
the lines
\usepackage{marvosym}
\newcommand{\euro}{{\EUR}}
or whatsoever
and have instead something like this:
\usepackage[latin9]{inputenc}
\usepackage[T9]{fontenc}
Just having
\usepackage[latin9]{inputenc}
in the file is not enough tex complains about the fact that
\textcurrency is not part of T1 encoding.
So will there be anything like
\usepackage[T9]{fontenc}
Uwe Brauer
Walter Schmidt
>
>
> The following works for me:
> \usepackage[latin9]{inputenc}
> \newcommand{\textcurrency}{\euro}
> \usepackage{marvosym}
> \newcommand{\euro}{{\EUR}}
Pardon me, but I don't believe that! With the latin9
option, the inputenc package does _not_ define the macro
\textcurrency at all. However, it defines \texteuro.
> But I would find it more logical to skip
> the lines
> \usepackage{marvosym}
> \newcommand{\euro}{{\EUR}}
> or whatsoever
>
> and have instead something like this:
> \usepackage[latin9]{inputenc}
> \usepackage[T9]{fontenc}
There is no "T9" output font encoding in LaTeX.
Maybe you mean:
\usepackage[latin9]{inputenc}
\usepackage{textcomop}
Thus, the Euro sign is mapped to the macro \texteuro.
The textomp package, in turn, defines \texteuro
to be an Euro sign from the current font.
However, most fonts do NOT provide an Euro sign of their
own, so you have to take it from a particular symbol font,
such as Marvosym, Eurosans or whatever. Of course, LaTeX
cannot read your mind: It does not know, which symbol
font you want to use. As a result, you have to load the
support package for the particular typeface, e.g.
\usepackage{marvosym}
_and_ you have to redefine the \texteuro command, so
as to use the Euro symbol from the requested symbol font.
Wit Marvosym this is \EUR, so you define:
\let\texteuro=\Eur
BTW, your name sounds somewhat German :-) Maybe you will
understand the following document, which is written in
German language:
<http://home.vr-web.de/was/x/latexeuro.pdf>
happy TeXing
Walter
--
Walter Schmidt <http://home.vr-web.de/was/fonts>
______________________________________________________________________
"I believe OS/2 is destined to be the most important operation system,
and possible program, of all time." (Bill Gates, Nov. 1987)
Uwe Brauer
> Uwe Brauer schrieb:
> >
> >
> > The following works for me:
> > \usepackage[latin9]{inputenc}
> > \newcommand{\textcurrency}{\euro}
> > \usepackage{marvosym}
> > \newcommand{\euro}{{\EUR}}
>
> Pardon me, but I don't believe that! With the latin9
> option, the inputenc package does _not_ define the macro
> \textcurrency at all. However, it defines \texteuro.
You are write, I use within Xemacs the xsybol package
and writting \244, is automatically converted to \textcurrency, but
displayed as ¤.
>
>
> > But I would find it more logical to skip
> > the lines
> > \usepackage{marvosym}
> > \newcommand{\euro}{{\EUR}}
> > or whatsoever
> >
> > and have instead something like this:
> > \usepackage[latin9]{inputenc}
> > \usepackage[T9]{fontenc}
>
> There is no "T9" output font encoding in LaTeX.
> Maybe you mean:
I know that there is NO, this was my point, I suggested there shold be
one. But reading you comments below, I start to understand that there
is a little mess with the euro sign, that is there is no widely
accepted standard. I like the one provided by \usepackage{marvosym}
ore
> BTW, your name sounds somewhat German :-) Maybe you will
> understand the following document, which is written in
> German language:
That is true; I am german.
>
> <http://home.vr-web.de/was/x/latexeuro.pdf>
Danke ich schau mir das mal an.
Uwe
Robin Fairbairns
there is a latex "standard" encoding that includes the currency sign
and a bunch other things like euros, pounds sterling (ha ha), cents,
yens, and so on -- it's ts1 (text symbols encoding).
it's not a "good" situation, but then latex is in no position to
impose standards on anyone, so it's best to create workarounds like
ts1 and textcomp.sty than to try and fly a new encoding into the gale
that is the opinion of the rest of the world. (note that the euro
defeats even the cunning ly1 encoding that gives you access to
everything available in adobe "standard" encoding...)
Uwe Brauer
hi
I am afraid I missed your point. But what do you mean by ts1?
For me the following
\usepackage[ts1]{inputenc} (that is how I interpreted your remarks
about standard encoding)
Did not work.
Just in case I also used
\usepackage{ts1}
which did not work neigher.
I admit I am completely confused about all the quirks of the Euro. I
thought it should be straightforward,
Some character, say \244, and some command, say \euro is mapped to a
new font-symbol.
One can argue about
a. The character to be used, \244 or something else
b. The design of this specific symbol
but that's it. However there are all sort of packages floating around
euro, textcomp etc etc
Uwe Brauer
Robin Fairbairns
>r...@pallas.cl.cam.ac.uk (Robin Fairbairns) writes:
>> Uwe Brauer <o...@eucmos.sim.ucm.es> wrote:
>> >Walter Schmidt <wal_s...@arcormail.de> writes:
>> >> Uwe Brauer schrieb:
>> >>
>> >> There is no "T9" output font encoding in LaTeX.
>> >> Maybe you mean:
>> >
>> >I know that there is NO, this was my point, I suggested there shold be
>> >one. But reading you comments below, I start to understand that there
>> >is a little mess with the euro sign, that is there is no widely
>> >accepted standard. I like the one provided by \usepackage{marvosym}
>> >ore
>>
>> there is a latex "standard" encoding that includes the currency sign
>> and a bunch other things like euros, pounds sterling (ha ha), cents,
>> yens, and so on -- it's ts1 (text symbols encoding).
>
you said there ought to be a t9, and walter said there wasn't, but i
followed up to say there _is_ a ts1.
>For me the following
>\usepackage[ts1]{inputenc} (that is how I interpreted your remarks
>about standard encoding)
ts1 is an output encoding.
>Did not work.
of course not.
>Just in case I also used
>\usepackage{ts1}
>which did not work neigher.
>
>I admit I am completely confused about all the quirks of the Euro. I
>thought it should be straightforward,
>
>Some character, say \244, and some command, say \euro is mapped to a
>new font-symbol.
the only _standard_ specification of a character code for the euro is
that in iso/iec 8859-15, iso latin-9. in that character set, the euro
appears at position 164 (i.e., 244 octal).
>One can argue about
>a. The character to be used, \244 or something else
>b. The design of this specific symbol
>
>but that's it.
however, you chose to argue that there should be another latex text
font encoding that contains a euro glyph, and i was pointing out that
(imo) profusion of latex font encodings does no-one any good, and can
reasonably be argued to do harm; and since in any case the glyph
appears in an existing encoding, we shouldn't muck about any further.
>However there are all sort of packages floating around
>euro, textcomp etc etc
i make no apology for the actions of the ctan team in accepting more
than one package that addresses the same problem. there are several
such packages that don't (imo again) add much to solving the practical
needs of users: but until one is looking at the situation in
retrospect, one can't know that. so we will continue the practice.
and of course, if you use an xemacs package targeted at dealing with
iso latin-1, and feed an iso latin-9 character to it (as you did), you
should expect to experience a stupid result. of course, it never
occurred to me (who've never used xemacs) that it would do such a
thing, so i tried to treat your problem as if it represented a
misunderstanding of my faq.
and of course, you should take my faq answer with a pinch of salt
anyway, since it was only written to deflect the torrent of abuse i
was suffering because there was no such answer. what the hell should
_i_ know about euros? -- i live in a country in which successive pig-
headed governments (none of which i've voted for) have contrived to
keep us out of the ez, so the matter isn't one i have to deal with in
my everyday life.
on the whole, i recommend that you should ignore the uk faq in future.
it's obviously irrelevant to german concerns.
Massimo D'Antoni
>
> The following works for me:
> \usepackage[latin9]{inputenc}
> \newcommand{\textcurrency}{\euro}
> \usepackage{marvosym}
> \newcommand{\euro}{{\EUR}}
>
>
What about:
\usepackage[marvosym]{eurofont}
\DeclareInputText{164}{\euro}
With the package eurofont you can choose either marvosym or adobe
fonts (in the latter case you don't need to specify an argument in
[]); personally I prefer the design of marvosym fonts.
Regards
Massimo
Walter Schmidt
> I use within Xemacs the xsybol package
> and writting \244, is automatically converted to \textcurrency, but
> displayed as ¤.
If \244 is display in the editor window as a sun symbol,
the editor should indeed translate it to \textcurrency.
However, if it is dosplayed as an Euro sign, the editor
should translate it to \texteuro.
Still better: keep away from these editor extensions,
which cause cinbfusion by bypassing LaTeX's well-designed
inputenc mechanism.
--
Walter