TeX - LaTeX Asked by Longjing on December 9, 2020
As titled.
I’ve been creating a few personal OpenType math fonts (by combining existing fonts, like Minion, with existing math fonts); one strange thing that I’ve observed along the way is that it seems like almost every OpenType math font defines the Latin-1 Supplement, Latin Extended A, and Latin Extended B character sets. For example, see this specimen table for Fira Math (Fira Math even defines Cyrillic, which I don’t quite understand either, for reasons below)
However, as far as I can tell (for LuaLaTeX use at least), unicode-math doesn’t map any of these glyphs to characters in math mode. Accented characters in math mode seem to always be created from combining the original characters with marks defined in U+00300 onwards (the "Combining Diacritical Marks" section in Fira Math’s specimen).
Also, personally, I always setup my fonts to pull the regular upright glyphs (used in mathrm, etc.) from the regular document font – which I can always trust to be properly configured for good typesetting.*
(* If anyone finds this point confusing, I’ll admit that I’m not entirely sure where mathrm is sourced from – the regular font from fontspec or the math font specified by unicode-math?)
In other words, if I was using Latin Modern Math as my math font, I would ask LaTeX to pull all the upright glyphs from Latin Modern. (This use case might not make much sense for Latin Modern, but for my own custom fonts – and as I’m not a professional typographer – I obviously choose to pull the upright fonts from the original file as they were created by a professional typographer. And I don’t see why one would bother to duplicate the same glyphs, without changes, into the math font). I don’t see why they need to be defined if they are either never used or are simply duplicates from the regular non-math font (as why not simply source the original font?)
Even stranger are the unicode fraction character sets (which Fira Math also defines, according to its specimen table), which I don’t think are ever used in mathmode, let alone being commonplace in math typesetting. TeX fractions seem to be always preferred and used in my experience.
In summary, I don’t quite see why these character sets are defined in OpenType Math fonts, at least for LaTeX use. They seem redundant to me, as they are either unused or seem to be simply duplicated (with no adjustments) from the regular non-math font:
There are only a few explanations that I can see why they were defined:
Am I correct in thinking that these glyphs are actually never used (and/or can be supplemented by asking LaTeX to source the glyphs from the regular non-math font), in a LuaLaTeX, unicode-math context?
They do it because it’s easy. Most OpenType math fonts are extensions of an existing font that already covers those ranges, or have a matching text font that does. Even if one doesn’t, nearly every glyph in those blocks combines accents and letters that the font already needs to have.
The basic upright Latin letters are used for symup
(although you’re correct that no math font seems to take advantage of this to use different alphabets for upright math letters, with symup
, than for words in math mode, with mathrm
—you must load a second font for that) and some math papers do use Cyrillic letters as math symbols, so those are not totally useless in math mode.
Correct answer by Davislor on December 9, 2020
Get help from others!
Recent Answers
Recent Questions
© 2024 TransWikia.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP