[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#435428: texlive-latex-base: cp1257.def is wrong

[Please keep the bug report in the CC list.]

On Wed, Aug 01, 2007 at 00:21 +0300, Martins Krikis wrote:
> 2007/7/31, Ralf Stubner <ralf.stubner@web.de>:
> > On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 19:49 +0300, db001@sanevision.com wrote:
> > Please take a look at the attached file, which is part of sid's TeX
> > Live 2007. Does that file solve your problems?
> Yes, the new file is nearly perfect.
> It seems to miss the \ProvidesFile{cp1257.def}
> at the beginning, however.

Thnaks. I have submitted this as a latex-bugreport. It allready
existed, though:

and is fixed in the upstream sources but not yet released. 

> And additionally, it kind-of introduces a new problem which
> I don't currently see a good solution for. It's the question
> of whether \DeclareInputText{236}{\c g} or
> \DeclareInputText{236}{\v g} is right... It is supposed to be
> a "small letter 'g' with a cedilla" but that cedilla should be
> atop it (not beneath) and inverted. It's not uncommon to
> use a caron instead. While all of my screen fonts have a
> proper ģ, once TeX has translated it into a \c{g} on input,
> I cannot get it to look decently in the final document anymore
> ---all the fonts just combine an accent and a letter and thus
> put a cedilla "underneath" the 'g', which is way worse
> than if it had been translated into a \v{g} to begin with.
> However, I cannot really blame this on cp1257.def and
> have to research further whether there is some way out
> of this problem.

This is a complicated issue. I would urge you not to follow the 'looks
better' approach, though, since this will make automatic processing of
the text more difficult (g with caron is also calid unicode). 

One of the fundamental problems here is that TeX's font output is
limited to 8bit fonts. And none of the 'standard' output encodings
contain the precomposed 'g with cedilla' that actually looks like 'g
with turned comma above'. You might be interested in the following


Note that littex has been packaged for Debian. I have not tested it,


Reply to: