6

A couple of days ago, the following question was put on hold as off-topic:

How to get "XeLaTeX + unicode-math" output as close as possible to that of pdflatex?

I asked this question over a year ago to solve a real problem I faced at the time. It is no longer strictly relevant to me, but I do not see why it should be closed. It may become useful to others.

I have a feeling the voters were a bit overzealous. I had a short discussion about this in the comments with tohecz. In the end he wasn't sure either. To summarize: it seems to me the question is on-topic, not subjective, and follows all the rules. The most that can be said is that it does not have an answer yet, or that the proper answer might be "There is no way to do this."

But I'd be happy to be educated.

6

For what its worth I think it's a reasonable question which may not have a completely reasonable answer, but several partial answers, from using classic fonts instead of unicode math fonts to get exactly the same output to choosing a "close" unicode font to moaning at Will (see github:-) at places where unicode-math could perhaps be more compatible than it is. Are you looking for reopen votes?

  • 1
    I don't personally need the question to be reopened. But reopening may be in the interest of future visitors, the general improvement of TeX.se and the consistent formulation and enforcement of its rules. --- Simply put: I thought the agreement to close this question was strange. And when something is strange, I poke at it. – mhelvens Sep 12 '14 at 18:46
  • 1
    @mhelvens voted:-) – David Carlisle Sep 12 '14 at 19:15

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .