Okay, I got to say, this super feature, even producing an index! I
found one gotcha: I had to change the encoding of my .ged file from
Unicode UTF-8 to Western (Mac OS Roman) in order for the pdf to be
produced.
A couple of questions: is it possible to change the selection of fonts
to be used? And is it possible to use different fonts for titles,
headings, etc.
Here are some problems I have with Generations LaTex Book: 1. In running a descendants report, the descendants, though appearing in the proper generations, are in some arbitrary order within the generation. 2. Some of the charts indicate "A ’+’ sign means that person has known ancestors not in this book." But not all of the people with known ancestors not in the book carry a plus sign; indeed, most of them do not. 3. The wording and arrangement events other than birth and death is weird. I would think they should be put in time order and integrated into a more cohesive automatically-generated narrative. 4. The Sources section is not in the table of contents nor in the page headers. 5. The wording introducing the sources for each person is awkward. 6. Backslashes aren't escaped. 7. Not all Unicode in comments turn into TeX-friendly codes. 8. Unicode in source IDs messes up BibTeX. 9. Unicode in bibliographic references messes up LaTeX. 10. It is quite common in genealogical research to know someone's baptism date but not the birthdate, or burial date but not the death date. This book doesn't take that into account.
But it is a relatively quick way to write a 1,000+ page book!
> Okay, I got to say, this super feature, even producing an index! I > found one gotcha: I had to change the encoding of my .ged file from > Unicode UTF-8 to Western (Mac OS Roman) in order for the pdf to be > produced.
> A couple of questions: is it possible to change the selection of fonts > to be used? And is it possible to use different fonts for titles, > headings, etc.
> Here are some problems I have with Generations LaTex Book: > 1. In running a descendants report, the descendants, though appearing in the proper generations, are in some arbitrary order within the generation.
Each chapter is in aphpbetical order. All relatives are found and then grouped by generations. I wanted some order,but could not think of an obvious genealogical ordering, so they are listed in alphabetical order.
> 2. Some of the charts indicate "A ’+’ sign means that person has known ancestors not in this book." But not all of the people with known ancestors not in the book carry a plus sign; indeed, most of them do not.
I will have to check. I know it comes after parents that start empty branches in some trees. In general, the trees work best in books on ancestors only. When decendents are involved, the linkages are more disconnected and many trees have empty sections.
> 3. The wording and arrangement events other than birth and death is weird. I would think they should be put in time order and integrated into a more cohesive automatically-generated narrative.
They are currently grouped by type rather than date. It is partly for efficiency in how that are looked up, but could be changed. I think it would need some new scripting features to change it. As for wording, it is not easy to compile events into great writing. Build 3 improved wording for occupations and graduations. I am open to suggestions on other events. One of the reasons they group by type is to better handling special case wording.
> 4. The Sources section is not in the table of contents nor in the page headers.
I will add that.
> 5. The wording introducing the sources for each person is awkward.
I am open to suggestions (and fairly easy to customize in the script). My files tend to have all sources attached to events rather then the record as a whole. As a result, that wording does not appear often in my test books; they just appear as footnotes.
> 6. Backslashes aren't escaped.
The script does escape them and it works for me. Do you have an example of where they are not escaped?
> 7. Not all Unicode in comments turn into TeX-friendly codes.
A real limitation of LaTeX, unfortunately. Unicode is done be encoding the file in UTF-8 and then using the package:
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
But the documentation of this package admits it does not do all UTF-8 character. It seems to work well with characters found in names and places (i.e., any accented letters), but does not do well with non-letter characters and seems to completely fail with non-printing characters.
The script has a list of bad characters and handles each as a special case. The other option is a different package, but I wanted something that would be part of the standard LaTeX install.
> 8. Unicode in source IDs messes up BibTeX.
Source IDs (in GEDCOM sense) will never have Unicode. Do you mean in the text of the source citation?
> 9. Unicode in bibliographic references messes up LaTeX. > 10. It is quite common in genealogical research to know someone's baptism date but not the birthdate, or burial date but not the death date. This book doesn't take that into account.
Although both burial events and baptism events are in the book.
> But it is a relatively quick way to write a 1,000+ page book!
It would be a challenge by other methods.
> =Jim
> On Apr 21, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Rick Thoman wrote:
>> Okay, I got to say, this super feature, even producing an index! I >> found one gotcha: I had to change the encoding of my .ged file from >> Unicode UTF-8 to Western (Mac OS Roman) in order for the pdf to be >> produced.
All .ged files used by GEDitCOM II are UTF-8 (it can import others, but maintains the file once imported as UTF-8). The LaTaX file created by the book is UFT-8 too. Thus, I am not sure where you needed Mac OS Roman encoding?
>> A couple of questions: is it possible to change the selection of fonts >> to be used? And is it possible to use different fonts for titles, >> headings, etc.
Fonts are somewhat limited by what is available in standard LaTeX package. It is probably possible to install other others on the revise the script to look for them, but I ject left the list at the ones I knew would be there (and make sense - e.g., not symbols fonts).
The book style is controlled by a LaTeX defs file (called BookLaTeXDefs.tex). This "style" sheet could be customized to mix fonts however you want. Do so would require knowledge of LaTeX font methods. You can play with it by generating a book and then opening the files in TeXShop, editing the .tex files, and then typsetting again.
Just to be clear on the unicode issues: we'll provide workarounds when
we can, for each problematic character.
If you can figure out which unicode characters cause problems, please
tell us what characters are the cause. We are hoping that it will be
feasible to handle each character so that it does not cause a
problem. We have tested the book creation with many unicode
characters, and the majority of printable ones seem to work. We have
included workarounds where we encountered characters that did not work
in LaTeX, as John has said.
Unfortunately, much of LaTeX pre-dates widespread use of unicode.
Kevin
On Apr 22, 8:47 pm, John Nairn <johnana...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Here are some problems I have with Generations LaTex Book:
> > 1. In running a descendants report, the descendants, though appearing in the proper generations, are in some arbitrary order within the generation.
> Each chapter is in aphpbetical order. All relatives are found and then grouped by generations. I wanted some order,but could not think of an obvious genealogical ordering, so they are listed in alphabetical order.
> > 2. Some of the charts indicate "A ’+’ sign means that person has known ancestors not in this book." But not all of the people with known ancestors not in the book carry a plus sign; indeed, most of them do not.
> I will have to check. I know it comes after parents that start empty branches in some trees. In general, the trees work best in books on ancestors only. When decendents are involved, the linkages are more disconnected and many trees have empty sections.
> > 3. The wording and arrangement events other than birth and death is weird. I would think they should be put in time order and integrated into a more cohesive automatically-generated narrative.
> They are currently grouped by type rather than date. It is partly for efficiency in how that are looked up, but could be changed. I think it would need some new scripting features to change it. As for wording, it is not easy to compile events into great writing. Build 3 improved wording for occupations and graduations. I am open to suggestions on other events. One of the reasons they group by type is to better handling special case wording.
> > 4. The Sources section is not in the table of contents nor in the page headers.
> I will add that.
> > 5. The wording introducing the sources for each person is awkward.
> I am open to suggestions (and fairly easy to customize in the script). My files tend to have all sources attached to events rather then the record as a whole. As a result, that wording does not appear often in my test books; they just appear as footnotes.
> > 6. Backslashes aren't escaped.
> The script does escape them and it works for me. Do you have an example of where they are not escaped?
> > 7. Not all Unicode in comments turn into TeX-friendly codes.
> A real limitation of LaTeX, unfortunately. Unicode is done be encoding the file in UTF-8 and then using the package:
> \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
> But the documentation of this package admits it does not do all UTF-8 character. It seems to work well with characters found in names and places (i.e., any accented letters), but does not do well with non-letter characters and seems to completely fail with non-printing characters.
> The script has a list of bad characters and handles each as a special case. The other option is a different package, but I wanted something that would be part of the standard LaTeX install.
> > 8. Unicode in source IDs messes up BibTeX.
> Source IDs (in GEDCOM sense) will never have Unicode. Do you mean in the text of the source citation?
> > 9. Unicode in bibliographic references messes up LaTeX.
> > 10. It is quite common in genealogical research to know someone's baptism date but not the birthdate, or burial date but not the death date. This book doesn't take that into account.
> Although both burial events and baptism events are in the book.
> > But it is a relatively quick way to write a 1,000+ page book!
> It would be a challenge by other methods.
> > =Jim
> > On Apr 21, 2012, at 5:14 PM, Rick Thoman wrote:
> >> Okay, I got to say, this super feature, even producing an index! I
> >> found one gotcha: I had to change the encoding of my .ged file from
> >> Unicode UTF-8 to Western (Mac OS Roman) in order for the pdf to be
> >> produced.
> All .ged files used by GEDitCOM II are UTF-8 (it can import others, but maintains the file once imported as UTF-8). The LaTaX file created by the book is UFT-8 too. Thus, I am not sure where you needed Mac OS Roman encoding?
> >> A couple of questions: is it possible to change the selection of fonts
> >> to be used? And is it possible to use different fonts for titles,
> >> headings, etc.
> Fonts are somewhat limited by what is available in standard LaTeX package. It is probably possible to install other others on the revise the script to look for them, but I ject left the list at the ones I knew would be there (and make sense - e.g., not symbols fonts).
> The book style is controlled by a LaTeX defs file (called BookLaTeXDefs.tex). This "style" sheet could be customized to mix fonts however you want. Do so would require knowledge of LaTeX font methods. You can play with it by generating a book and then opening the files in TeXShop, editing the .tex files, and then typsetting again.
>> Here are some problems I have with Generations LaTex Book:
>> 1. In running a descendants report, the descendants, though appearing in the proper generations, are in some arbitrary order within the generation.
> Each chapter is in aphpbetical order. All relatives are found and then grouped by generations. I wanted some order,but could not think of an obvious genealogical ordering, so they are listed in alphabetical order.
For ancestors, I would think ahnentafel order is appropriate. For descendants, register order.
>> 5. The wording introducing the sources for each person is awkward.
> I am open to suggestions (and fairly easy to customize in the script). My files tend to have all sources attached to events rather then the record as a whole. As a result, that wording does not appear often in my test books; they just appear as footnotes.
I can change it I suppose.
>> 6. Backslashes aren't escaped.
> The script does escape them and it works for me. Do you have an example of where they are not escaped?
Backslashes don't work for me in surnames. Maybe I shouldn't put backslashes in surnames. How should I encode someone named John Smith/Jones? (Not Smith-Jones.)
>> 7. Not all Unicode in comments turn into TeX-friendly codes.
> A real limitation of LaTeX, unfortunately. Unicode is done be encoding the file in UTF-8 and then using the package:
> \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
> But the documentation of this package admits it does not do all UTF-8 character. It seems to work well with characters found in names and places (i.e., any accented letters), but does not do well with non-letter characters and seems to completely fail with non-printing characters.
> The script has a list of bad characters and handles each as a special case. The other option is a different package, but I wanted something that would be part of the standard LaTeX install.
How about using XeLaTeX instead?
>> 8. Unicode in source IDs messes up BibTeX.
> Source IDs (in GEDCOM sense) will never have Unicode. Do you mean in the text of the source citation?
No, I mean in GEDCOM IDs. Maybe I shouldn't do that either! So far GEDitCOM has let me get away with it, but I can fix it.
>> On Apr 21, 2012, at 10:40 PM, Jim Eggert wrote:
>>> Here are some problems I have with Generations LaTex Book: >>> 1. In running a descendants report, the descendants, though appearing in the proper generations, are in some arbitrary order within the generation.
>> Each chapter is in aphpbetical order. All relatives are found and then grouped by generations. I wanted some order,but could not think of an obvious genealogical ordering, so they are listed in alphabetical order.
> For ancestors, I would think ahnentafel order is appropriate. For descendants, register order.
I am not sure what "register order" means. Also, a large book finds all ancestors first and then for all tree tops (last ancestor in each line), if finds all their descendants. The descendants, therefore, might be from multiple and perhaps rather disconnected trees. The only exception would be the special case of a book target to one individual (books can have more than one target) and a book with no ancestor generations.
>>> 6. Backslashes aren't escaped.
>> The script does escape them and it works for me. Do you have an example of where they are not escaped?
> Backslashes don't work for me in surnames. Maybe I shouldn't put backslashes in surnames. How should I encode someone named John Smith/Jones? (Not Smith-Jones.)
This was another LaTeX limitation I did not know about. Back slashes are escaped by using LaTeX verbatim (or \verb) command. I just read, however, that the \verb method cannot be passed as an argument to LaTeX style definitions and names are often put in such definitions. I current do not know a better way to escape them (for example, \\ does not work because that means new line in LaTeX). The best solution now is to not use backslash in the name (also don't use '~' or '^' for similar reason)
Regarding John Smith/Jones:
I am not sure what you are trying to document in this name style - is it an unusual name or you are not sure which name. Some ideas:
1. Forward slash will not work because that conflicts in GEDCOM uses of slashes to signal surnames 2. Backslash is fine, except for books (i.e., GEDitCOM II is fine with them, by LaTeX is not) 3. If you mean the person's name is John Smith OR John Jones, you can give the person two names and enter each one as a full and complete name. Only the first name, however, will appear in books. 4. You could explicitly include the second name outside the surname such as "John /Smith/ (or Jones)". The slashes indicated the surname and you can add anything after like a comment. This name will appear in the index window as "Smith, John (or Jones)." If you want the Jones closer to Smith, it can be in the surname by entering "John /Smith (or Jones)/" (i.e., a surname with spaces indicated by the slashes). 5. You could pick almost any other character except '/ ', due to GEDCOM; '-', to avoid confusion with hyphenated name, and '\', '~', or '^', which are all done with \verb command. All other special LaTeX characters (namely '$', '%', '&', '_', '{', '}', and '#') are OK as is any character that was not mentioned here (probably). You can probe into Unicode characters to find something special.
>>> 7. Not all Unicode in comments turn into TeX-friendly codes.
>> A real limitation of LaTeX, unfortunately. Unicode is done be encoding the file in UTF-8 and then using the package:
>> \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
>> But the documentation of this package admits it does not do all UTF-8 character. It seems to work well with characters found in names and places (i.e., any accented letters), but does not do well with non-letter characters and seems to completely fail with non-printing characters.
>> The script has a list of bad characters and handles each as a special case. The other option is a different package, but I wanted something that would be part of the standard LaTeX install.
> How about using XeLaTeX instead?
Have considered it, but script working now and reluctant to change (in case other issues). I will experiment. I have used LaTeX for many years, but never used XeLaTeX.
>>> 8. Unicode in source IDs messes up BibTeX.
>> Source IDs (in GEDCOM sense) will never have Unicode. Do you mean in the text of the source citation?
> No, I mean in GEDCOM IDs. Maybe I shouldn't do that either! So far GEDitCOM has let me get away with it, but I can fix it.
Normally GEDitCOM II creates IDs for you. I guess you have created you own (which is allowed), but not anticipated by the book script.
> > On Apr 22, 2012, at 11:47 PM, John Nairn wrote:
> >> On Apr 21, 2012, at 10:40 PM, Jim Eggert wrote:
> >>> Here are some problems I have with Generations LaTex Book:
> >>> 1. In running a descendants report, the descendants, though appearing in the proper generations, are in some arbitrary order within the generation.
> >> Each chapter is in aphpbetical order. All relatives are found and then grouped by generations. I wanted some order,but could not think of an obvious genealogical ordering, so they are listed in alphabetical order.
> > For ancestors, I would think ahnentafel order is appropriate. For descendants, register order.
> I am not sure what "register order" means. Also, a large book finds all ancestors first and then for all tree tops (last ancestor in each line), if finds all their descendants. The descendants, therefore, might be from multiple and perhaps rather disconnected trees. The only exception would be the special case of a book target to one individual (books can have more than one target) and a book with no ancestor generations.
> >>> 6. Backslashes aren't escaped.
> >> The script does escape them and it works for me. Do you have an example of where they are not escaped?
> > Backslashes don't work for me in surnames. Maybe I shouldn't put backslashes in surnames. How should I encode someone named John Smith/Jones? (Not Smith-Jones.)
> This was another LaTeX limitation I did not know about. Back slashes are escaped by using LaTeX verbatim (or \verb) command. I just read, however, that the \verb method cannot be passed as an argument to LaTeX style definitions and names are often put in such definitions. I current do not know a better way to escape them (for example, \\ does not work because that means new line in LaTeX). The best solution now is to not use backslash in the name (also don't use '~' or '^' for similar reason)
> Regarding John Smith/Jones:
> I am not sure what you are trying to document in this name style - is it an unusual name or you are not sure which name. Some ideas:
> 1. Forward slash will not work because that conflicts in GEDCOM uses of slashes to signal surnames
> 2. Backslash is fine, except for books (i.e., GEDitCOM II is fine with them, by LaTeX is not)
> 3. If you mean the person's name is John Smith OR John Jones, you can give the person two names and enter each one as a full and complete name. Only the first name, however, will appear in books.
> 4. You could explicitly include the second name outside the surname such as "John /Smith/ (or Jones)". The slashes indicated the surname and you can add anything after like a comment. This name will appear in the index window as "Smith, John (or Jones)." If you want the Jones closer to Smith, it can be in the surname by entering "John /Smith (or Jones)/" (i.e., a surname with spaces indicated by the slashes).
> 5. You could pick almost any other character except '/ ', due to GEDCOM; '-', to avoid confusion with hyphenated name, and '\', '~', or '^', which are all done with \verb command. All other special LaTeX characters (namely '$', '%', '&', '_', '{', '}', and '#') are OK as is any character that was not mentioned here (probably). You can probe into Unicode characters to find something special.
> >>> 7. Not all Unicode in comments turn into TeX-friendly codes.
> >> A real limitation of LaTeX, unfortunately. Unicode is done be encoding the file in UTF-8 and then using the package:
> >> \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
> >> But the documentation of this package admits it does not do all UTF-8 character. It seems to work well with characters found in names and places (i.e., any accented letters), but does not do well with non-letter characters and seems to completely fail with non-printing characters.
> >> The script has a list of bad characters and handles each as a special case. The other option is a different package, but I wanted something that would be part of the standard LaTeX install.
> > How about using XeLaTeX instead?
> Have considered it, but script working now and reluctant to change (in case other issues). I will experiment. I have used LaTeX for many years, but never used XeLaTeX.
> >>> 8. Unicode in source IDs messes up BibTeX.
> >> Source IDs (in GEDCOM sense) will never have Unicode. Do you mean in the text of the source citation?
> > No, I mean in GEDCOM IDs. Maybe I shouldn't do that either! So far GEDitCOM has let me get away with it, but I can fix it.
> Normally GEDitCOM II creates IDs for you. I guess you have created you own (which is allowed), but not anticipated by the book script.
So I fixed my database to be more compatible:
1. changed all the backslashes in my surnames into hyphens
2. changed all the GEDCOM IDs to be ASCII-only
This was easy because I just used a text editor on the underlying GEDCOM file in the .gedpkg file.
Then I tried using XeLaTex to compile a book output by Generations LaTeX Book. It worked! I had to change a couple of things in the .tex files output by Generations LaTeX Book:
In the file BookLaTeXBody.tex, change the lines
\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
\usepackage{_whatever_font_}
to
\usepackage{fontspec}
\setmainfont{Times New Roman}
And in the file BookLaTeXDefs.tex, delete the line
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
I used Times New Roman because it had all the glyphs I needed in my book (including Cyrillic). You may require a different main font if you need other glyphs. But with these changes, XeLaTeX resolved my BibTeX and Unicode problems!
>> On Apr 21, 2012, at 10:40 PM, Jim Eggert wrote:
>>> Here are some problems I have with Generations LaTex Book:
>>> 1. In running a descendants report, the descendants, though appearing in the proper generations, are in some arbitrary order within the generation.
>> Each chapter is in aphpbetical order. All relatives are found and then grouped by generations. I wanted some order,but could not think of an obvious genealogical ordering, so they are listed in alphabetical order.
> For ancestors, I would think ahnentafel order is appropriate. For descendants, register order.
>>> 5. The wording introducing the sources for each person is awkward.
>> I am open to suggestions (and fairly easy to customize in the script). My files tend to have all sources attached to events rather then the record as a whole. As a result, that wording does not appear often in my test books; they just appear as footnotes.
> I can change it I suppose.
>>> 6. Backslashes aren't escaped.
>> The script does escape them and it works for me. Do you have an example of where they are not escaped?
> Backslashes don't work for me in surnames. Maybe I shouldn't put backslashes in surnames. How should I encode someone named John Smith/Jones? (Not Smith-Jones.)
>>> 7. Not all Unicode in comments turn into TeX-friendly codes.
>> A real limitation of LaTeX, unfortunately. Unicode is done be encoding the file in UTF-8 and then using the package:
>> \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
>> But the documentation of this package admits it does not do all UTF-8 character. It seems to work well with characters found in names and places (i.e., any accented letters), but does not do well with non-letter characters and seems to completely fail with non-printing characters.
>> The script has a list of bad characters and handles each as a special case. The other option is a different package, but I wanted something that would be part of the standard LaTeX install.
> How about using XeLaTeX instead?
>>> 8. Unicode in source IDs messes up BibTeX.
>> Source IDs (in GEDCOM sense) will never have Unicode. Do you mean in the text of the source citation?
> No, I mean in GEDCOM IDs. Maybe I shouldn't do that either! So far GEDitCOM has let me get away with it, but I can fix it.
I tried it but typesetting failed at the first command:
(./BookLaTeXBody.tex
! Undefined control sequence.
l.7 \documentclass
[12pt]{book}
Do you have to change any other commands (although I found \documentclass at the start of a sample XeTeX file onthe web). I also found at /usr/texbin that XeLaTeX is an alias for XeTeX command.
> So I fixed my database to be more compatible:
> 1. changed all the backslashes in my surnames into hyphens
> 2. changed all the GEDCOM IDs to be ASCII-only
> This was easy because I just used a text editor on the underlying GEDCOM file in the .gedpkg file.
> Then I tried using XeLaTex to compile a book output by Generations LaTeX Book. It worked! I had to change a couple of things in the .tex files output by Generations LaTeX Book:
> In the file BookLaTeXBody.tex, change the lines
> \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
> \usepackage{_whatever_font_}
> to
> \usepackage{fontspec}
> \setmainfont{Times New Roman}
> And in the file BookLaTeXDefs.tex, delete the line
> \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
> I used Times New Roman because it had all the glyphs I needed in my book (including Cyrillic). You may require a different main font if you need other glyphs. But with these changes, XeLaTeX resolved my BibTeX and Unicode problems!
> =Jim
> On Apr 23, 2012, at 1:35 AM, Jim Eggert wrote:
>> On Apr 22, 2012, at 11:47 PM, John Nairn wrote:
>>> On Apr 21, 2012, at 10:40 PM, Jim Eggert wrote:
>>>> Here are some problems I have with Generations LaTex Book:
>>>> 1. In running a descendants report, the descendants, though appearing in the proper generations, are in some arbitrary order within the generation.
>>> Each chapter is in aphpbetical order. All relatives are found and then grouped by generations. I wanted some order,but could not think of an obvious genealogical ordering, so they are listed in alphabetical order.
>> For ancestors, I would think ahnentafel order is appropriate. For descendants, register order.
>>>> 5. The wording introducing the sources for each person is awkward.
>>> I am open to suggestions (and fairly easy to customize in the script). My files tend to have all sources attached to events rather then the record as a whole. As a result, that wording does not appear often in my test books; they just appear as footnotes.
>> I can change it I suppose.
>>>> 6. Backslashes aren't escaped.
>>> The script does escape them and it works for me. Do you have an example of where they are not escaped?
>> Backslashes don't work for me in surnames. Maybe I shouldn't put backslashes in surnames. How should I encode someone named John Smith/Jones? (Not Smith-Jones.)
>>>> 7. Not all Unicode in comments turn into TeX-friendly codes.
>>> A real limitation of LaTeX, unfortunately. Unicode is done be encoding the file in UTF-8 and then using the package:
>>> \usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
>>> But the documentation of this package admits it does not do all UTF-8 character. It seems to work well with characters found in names and places (i.e., any accented letters), but does not do well with non-letter characters and seems to completely fail with non-printing characters.
>>> The script has a list of bad characters and handles each as a special case. The other option is a different package, but I wanted something that would be part of the standard LaTeX install.
>> How about using XeLaTeX instead?
>>>> 8. Unicode in source IDs messes up BibTeX.
>>> Source IDs (in GEDCOM sense) will never have Unicode. Do you mean in the text of the source citation?
>> No, I mean in GEDCOM IDs. Maybe I shouldn't do that either! So far GEDitCOM has let me get away with it, but I can fix it.
Tell TeXShop you are doing XeLaTeX, not XeTeX. Typeset in XeLaTex, then BibTeX, then XeLaTex two more times.
I'm using TeXShop 2.43, which runs XeTeX Version 3.1415926-2.3-0.9997.5 (TeX Live 2011). Perhaps part of the difference when you tell TeXShop to use XeLaTeX is that it enters extended mode.
> Do you have to change any other commands (although I found \documentclass at the start of a sample XeTeX file onthe web). I also found at /usr/texbin that XeLaTeX is an alias for XeTeX command.
OK. I can typeset using XeLaTeX in TexShop, but I would like the book script to automatically typeset the book for you in XeLaTeX. I think I am using the same shell command as TexShop uses, but it does not work on the command line. Jim, if you are familiy in LaTeX output in command line use, below is the console output and I used text differencing to find the three differences before my command line method failed (see lines beginning in "-----"). Can you think what might be the problem? By the way, the script invokes XeLaTeX using
LaTeX Warning: Citation `BSR227' on page 8 undefined on input line 206.
Underfull \vbox (badness 10000) has occurred while \output is active [8]
LaTeX Warning: Citation `BSR227' on page 9 undefined on input line 214.
LaTeX Warning: Reference `Holmes:1881UK' on page 9 undefined on input line 214.
LaTeX Warning: Citation `BSR228' on page 9 undefined on input line 214.
LaTeX Warning: Citation `BSR223' on page 9 undefined on input line 214.
LaTeX Warning: Reference `Holmes:1901UK' on page 9 undefined on input line 214.
------ Stops in in GEDitCOM II
[9/usr/texbin/xelatex: fwrite: Broken pipe
------ changes to this and then continues to end in TeXShop
[9]
...
On Apr 30, 2012, at 7:37 PM, Jim Eggert wrote:
> Tell TeXShop you are doing XeLaTeX, not XeTeX. Typeset in XeLaTex, then BibTeX, then XeLaTex two more times.
> I'm using TeXShop 2.43, which runs XeTeX Version 3.1415926-2.3-0.9997.5 (TeX Live 2011). Perhaps part of the difference when you tell TeXShop to use XeLaTeX is that it enters extended mode.
