[XeTeX] XeTeX, XeTeXpicfile, and counter-intuitive behaviour

[Philip TAYLOR]

Heiko Oberdiek wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 01, 2011 at 06:06:13PM +0000, Philip TAYLOR wrote:
>
>> Heiko Oberdiek wrote:
>>
>>> Because they are solving those problems for you and others now
>>> and in the future. That is one of the main reasons for a package,
>>> providing an easier interface for tricky low level stuff.
>>
>> I don't /want/ "an easier interface", Heiko : I /hate/ LaTeX,
>
> Then use a ConTeXt module or whatever.

I think you're deliberately missing the point :-)
>
> And the syntax of graphicx' \includegraphics:
>
>    \includegraphics[<key value list>]{<image file>}
>
> is not very special that this can only be used in LaTeX.

I agree.  But I don't want to learn all of the foibles
and weaknesses (or even the strengths) of \includegraphics :
I want to work with the nuts and bolts of TeX (or XeTeX),
not with someone else's idea of an possible interface to it.

> Then, please, don't surprise me, that you are suprised that TeX
> has surprised you. ;-)

Er, yes !

> Yes, I don't know a complete, comprehensive documentation of XeTeX.
> I am aware of:
> * Mark A. Wicks: Dvipdfm User's Manual (dvipdfm.pdf)
> * Jin-Hwan Cho: DVI specials for PDF generation;
>    TUGboat, Volume 30 (2009), No. 1 (dvipdfmx-special.pdf)
> * Will Robertson: The XeTeX reference guide (XeTeX-reference.pdf)

I am familiar with the last, of course, but clearly
need to visit the first two.

> Can you rephrase this in understandable words
> and in excellent English of course :-)
> and send the result to Will that he can update
> the reference guide?

It will be my pleasure.  I will also ask him to consider making
some changes to the documentation concerning \font, because
(IMHO) it lacks sufficient examples, and (b) he uses the
term "Options" when he is referring to "Font features"
(which he clearly distinguishes elsewhere) :

> Options for all fonts
> Some font features may be applied for any font. These are

** Phil.