XeTeX specific patch

[Alex Lubberts]

Hi,

Attached is a patch related to using XeTeX together with tufte-latex. First I added the setup of default fonts (Pagella/Heros/Cursor, the TeX Gyre variants of Palatino, Helvetica and Courier; Courier is a bit out of place.. what font could be used instead?), and the math font Asana.

I also noted that my documents stopped working because currently the tufte class loads fontspec and I was loading fontspec in my documents as well, but with different options. (I’m using Hoefler/Gill Sans/Andale that come with Mac OS X together with the mathspec package.) Therefore I changed the code so that when the option nofonts is used, the class will not load fontspec. (unless bidi is also issued)

At the same time I tried to solve issue 45 as well by making use of the LetterSpace feature of fontspec. I tried to mimic the setup of pdflatex, although I’m not sure if one should letterspace smallcaps: in a good quality font the extra needed space should be accounted for already if one turns on the kerning feature (which is on by default). Or am I wrong here?

One thing that isn’t working is the use of math in the list of figures. Using math in captions is fine, when the list of figures is compiled I get:

** WARNING ** Failed to convert input string to UTF16…

I suspect this has something to do with fontspec/unicode-math, but I don’t know the cause. Any ideas?

Regards,

Alex

[Jeffrey Goldberg]

I realize that I'm replying to something from three and a half years ago, but ...

On Sunday, May 1, 2011 1:38:44 PM UTC-5, DeLub wrote:

Attached is a patch related to using XeTeX together with tufte-latex.

Excellent. I've been looking for something like that.

Does anyone know what it would take to get this patch submitted to "official" Tufte-LaTeX?

I can apply it on my own systems, but I would like my documents to be more portable, so

I would very much like to see this patch – or something like it – make it into the distributed

versions.

Cheers,

-j

[Kevin Godby]

Hello, Jeffrey.

On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Jeffrey Goldberg <jef...@goldmark.org> wrote:
> I realize that I'm replying to something from three and a half years ago,
> but ...
>
> On Sunday, May 1, 2011 1:38:44 PM UTC-5, DeLub wrote:
>> Attached is a patch related to using XeTeX together with tufte-latex.
>
> Excellent. I've been looking for something like that.
>
> Does anyone know what it would take to get this patch submitted to
> "official" Tufte-LaTeX?

Changing the default typefaces used by the Tufte-LaTeX classes is a
huge change—not in the code per se, but in the appearance of the
resulting document. Generally, LaTeX packages try to be backward
compatible (as much as is feasible) so that if you recompile a
document using a newer version of the package, the document won't have
changed drastically. When there are large changes made, the package is
sometimes renamed.

I do have a long list of updates I'd like to make, but I suspect
that'd entail a newly named package or at a minimum a way to revert to
the original defaults.

As far as changing the default typefaces go, I think it's also worth
considering the recent fbb package which provides a Bembo-like
typeface (for both pdfLaTeX and XeLaTeX). I haven't had a chance to
examine this typeface closely yet, so I do't know if it'd make for a
suitable default. It sounds like it'd more closely match the Bembo
fonts that Tufte used in his books, though. I'm not sure what kind of
math support the fbb fonts provide (if any).

—Kevin Godby

[Jeffrey Goldberg]

Thank you, Kevin.

On 2014-11-29, at 4:16 PM, Kevin Godby <god...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 9:57 AM, Jeffrey Goldberg <jef...@goldmark.org> wrote:

>> Does anyone know what it would take to get this patch submitted to
>> "official" Tufte-LaTeX?
>
> Changing the default typefaces used by the Tufte-LaTeX classes is a

> huge change […]in the appearance of the resulting document.

Ah. Of course. Thank you for reminding me of what should have
been obvious.

I wasn’t actually thinking about the typeface change, but the patch to
cover the incompatibility of XeLaTeX with soul.sty.

I should have thought through and narrowed my request appropriately.

> Generally, LaTeX packages try to be backward compatible

I agree that that is a correct design goal.

> I do have a long list of updates I'd like to make, but I suspect
> that'd entail a newly named package or at a minimum a way to revert to
> the original defaults.

Using new class options would allow older documents to produce consistent
behavior. It may not be the nicest way to work, but it is probably the safest
way to increase compatibility with today’s packages and systems while not
breaking any existing documents.

> As far as changing the default typefaces go, I think it's also worth
> considering the recent fbb package which provides a Bembo-like
> typeface (for both pdfLaTeX and XeLaTeX). I haven't had a chance to
> examine this typeface closely yet, so I do't know if it'd make for a
> suitable default. It sounds like it'd more closely match the Bembo
> fonts that Tufte used in his books, though. I'm not sure what kind of
> math support the fbb fonts provide (if any).

I don’t know either, but that is a good point.

Thanks!

-j