[XeTeX] XeLatex + Unicode + Footnote issue

[Sreenivasa Guttal]

Yes. I tried ledmac and it does work:)

\usepackage{ledmac}
\usepackage{perpage}
\renewcommand*{\thefootnoteB}{\arabic{footnoteB}}
\footparagraphX{B}
\MakePerPage{B}

However, \MakePerPage is not working. Is there any other way to get per page
foot numbering working with ledmac?

Thanks,
Sreenivasa

On Thu, Mar 19, 2009 at 2:35 PM, John Was <john.was at ntlworld.com> wrote:

>  I did, as an experiment, quickly try some Arabic text in an
> Edmac-generated footnote, and it worked.  That is not to say that Edmac will
> hold up in all circumstances, though.  One advantage of trying it out would
> be that if it does indeed work, then the issue would be with Bigfoot and not
> the font itself.  If it doesn't work, you are perhaps not any further
> forward...
>
> John
>
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>   *From:* Sreenivasa Guttal <sreenivasa.guttal at gmail.com>
> *To:* Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other platforms <xetex at tug.org>
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 19, 2009 8:53 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [XeTeX] XeLatex + Unicode + Footnote issue
>
> Thanks for your comments.
>
> I choose bigfoot as it provided most of the features I wanted to have. But,
> I can check if edmac satisfies my requirements, but before, are we saying
> that it is a footnote package issue? Considering that it works for some
> fonts, I was wondering if the issue is somewhere else. Specifically, if
> edmac works for the same fonts, where bigfoot does not, then it could be a
> footnote package issue.
>
> Regards,
> Sreenivasa
>
> 2009/3/19 John Was <john.was at ntlworld.com>
>
>>  Hello
>>
>> I haven't been following this thread closely, but if the task in hand is
>> creation of a critical edition, the Edmac package may serve your needs.  It
>> allows several layers of footnotes (up to five by default, I think, though
>> more can be added), and each one can be formatted differently:  I have used
>> run-on app. crit. style in conjunction with two-column editorial footnotes
>> and full-width original footnotes, each with a different cueing system (*
>> etc. for authorial notes, superior italic letters for app. crit. [but
>> line-numbers can be used too if one doesn't want to clutter up the text with
>> cues], normal superscript numbers for editorial notes).  Edmac's system of
>> automatically extracting the lemma from the text and putting it in the app.
>> crit. is a little tortuous, I find, so I have always provided the lemmata
>> myself within the app. crit. note - but the package itself has
>> proved robust, both in old EmTeX and now in XeTeX (I haven't used LaTeX
>> varieties though have often been tempted!).
>>
>> When I last looked at Bigfoot, it seemed to provide a great deal of extra
>> functionality, but if you don't require all that, Edmac might work.  You do
>> need to read the documentation with some care (though nowadays I tend to
>> copy and adapt macros that I've used in earlier work, so I'm rather hazy
>> myself about the finer points).
>>
>> John
>>
>>
>>   ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* Sreenivasa Guttal <sreenivasa.guttal at gmail.com>
>> *To:* news3 at nililand.de ; Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other
>> platforms <xetex at tug.org>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 19, 2009 8:20 AM
>> *Subject:* Re: [XeTeX] XeLatex + Unicode + Footnote issue
>>
>> Yes. For some Sanskrit fonts, I saw it partially working.
>>
>> I am a bit new to `tex world'. Is there a way out? This is a very
>> important feature for critical editions.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Sreenivasa
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 9:03 PM, Ulrike Fischer <news3 at nililand.de>wrote:
>>
>>> Am Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:04:02 -0400 schrieb Patrick Carr:
>>>
>>> >> I can reproduce the problem even with normal english text. It seems
>>> >> to be font related, some fonts gives footnotes as expected in
>>> >> para-mode and other not.
>>> >
>>> > I thought it might be fonts with real superscript numerals versus
>>> > those without, but no. Using your example with a myriad of fonts, I
>>> > got newlines for each footnote regardless of the font I used. I.e., it
>>> > didn't work at all for me. At least it wasn't intermittent.
>>> >
>>> > (This is XeTeXk, Version 3.1415926-2.2-0.999.6 (Web2C 7.5.7))
>>>
>>>
>>> I too no longer get different behaviour if I use only manyfoot
>>> (that's quite confusing, I don't think that I changed something),
>>> but if I use bigfoot instead it reappears: Verdana gives newline,
>>> Cambria not.
>>>
>>> I too suspected the superscripts at first, but
>>> \makeatletter\let\@textsuperscript\relax gives normal numbers but
>>> doesn't change the behaviour.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Ulrike Fischer
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> XeTeX mailing list
>>> postmaster at tug.org
>>> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> XeTeX mailing list
>> postmaster at tug.org
>> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> XeTeX mailing list
>> postmaster at tug.org
>> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>>
>>
>  ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> XeTeX mailing list
> postmaster at tug.org
> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> XeTeX mailing list
> postmaster at tug.org
> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://tug.org/pipermail/xetex/attachments/20090324/eb67fb5f/attachment.html