[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx
From: |
Werner LEMBERG |
Subject: |
Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx |
Date: |
Sat, 03 Jun 2017 07:20:17 +0200 (CEST) |
> 1. If you are doing new documents, and do not have a lot of baggages
> and opinion about how Latex *should* work, LuaTeX and XeTeX can
> both access arbitrary platform fonts. I have no experience with
> LuaTeX; I tried XeTeX, and found the change in layout,
> word-breaks, hyphenations unfamiliar.
I've tried both, and thanks to the uniform `fontspec' interface, you
usually don't have to worry about the underlying engine.
> [...] if you are writing a new document in LaTeX and needs to do
> a lot of languages or a lot of different fonts, those are the
> ways to go for flexible handling of fonts, and other typographic
> features of non-English.
Exactly.
> 2a. The main difference between going through postscript with dvips
> ->ps2pdf vs directly to pdf via pdfTeX/dvipdfmx is graphics. If
> you need psfrag or any of the latex packages which depends on
> running through ghostscript, then you have to use the former.
As mentioned in a previous mail, `pstool' might be an alternative so
that you can use modern engines.
> 2b. There are a number of differences between pdfTeX and dvipdfmx -
In general, dvipdfmx produces *much* more compact PDFs.
> the former has a larger (more English-speaking) community, and
> the latter was/is run by a smaller number of Korean people.
This is no longer correct: dvipdfmx is now maintained directly in
TeXLive (essentially by all TeXLive developers). Note that dvipdfmx
is also the base for `xdvipdfmx', the DVI driver for xetex. For this
reason, many glitches found in xdvipdfmx are backported to dvipdfmx.
> One of the explicit goals of the latter is preserving
> text-searchability, i.e., pdf's from dvipdfmx preserves encoding
> information, and you can extract non-english text, cut-and-paste
> from it (the same applies to the modern XeTeX/LuaTeX output
> also), have its content indexed by a Google's search engine,
> etc. Whereas non-English dvips/ps2pdf and pdfTeX generated
> pdf's loses encoding information and loses the full
> compatability of being indexed by a search-engine.
This is only partially correct. There exists the `cmap' LaTeX
package, which creates proper `CMap' PDF objects to make text using
encodings like T1 or T2A searchable. Additionally, IIRC, pdftex
itself has got better support for the creation of `ToUnicode' mappings
a few years ago.
> 5. I'll like to make all of them work again, so I'll possibly try to
> get dvips and pdfTex to work also; personally I am leaning on
> dvipdfmx as it lets me use the font as is (sharing with
> platform-viewing) without going whole-sale the XeTeX/LuaTeX way.
Thanks for working on this!
Werner
- Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx, Hin-Tak Leung, 2017/06/02
- Message not available
- Message not available
- Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx, Amigo Aleman, 2017/06/02
- Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx, Werner LEMBERG, 2017/06/02
- Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx, Thorsten, 2017/06/02
- Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx, Werner LEMBERG, 2017/06/03
- Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx, Thorsten, 2017/06/06
- Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx, Werner LEMBERG, 2017/06/07
Re: [cjk] output with source han and xdvipdfmx,
Werner LEMBERG <=