3

I use a lot the unicode-math package to type directly unicode in the source, but there are some side effects that I do not fully understand.

Here is a MWE with just an equation:

\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{amsmath}
%\usepackage{unicode-math}
\begin{document}
\[\left\lVert \sum x_i-y \right\rVert\]
\end{document}

which produces:

enter image description here

Now here is what I get if I load the unicode-math package :

enter image description here

As you can see, the spacing is not the same, and the height of the \lVert and \rVert symbols is reduced.

So is it the expected behavior ? Is it a problem with loading order (it does not change anything if I load unicode-math first, though) ? Should I load some additional package ?

Note that the MWE does not use unicode, but in practice I do, so I would really like to understand how to get both working together, not a workaround to avoid using unicode-math.

Zooky
  • 451
  • Which engine are you using? xelatex or lualatex? – daleif Feb 13 '18 at 10:49
  • unicode-math changes the math font and the new font can have different font dimens and different glyph sizes. You don't need unicode-math "to type directly unicode" (what ever you exactly mean with this). – Ulrike Fischer Feb 13 '18 at 10:49
  • I am using xelatex, sorry I forgot to say that. Which other package can be used as a replacement ? (I mean, not necessarily controlling the math font, but being able to type unicode symbols in the source, that will be interpreted as the corresponding glyphs.) – Zooky Feb 13 '18 at 12:20
  • See https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/34604/entering-unicode-characters-in-latex (see all the answers, useful suggestions might be at the bottom. There are suggestions of utf8x, unixode, unicode-math – user202729 Sep 12 '21 at 00:39

0 Answers0