[texhax] TeX-compatible font containing yogh?

[D. R. Evans]

Karl Berry said the following at 04/22/2009 03:45 PM :
>     that the LM family contains no yogh (nor even an ezh, which would do at a
> 
> Scott Pakin's comprehensive symbol guide (texdoc comprehensive) has some
> mentions of yogh, none of ezh.  I don't know if they are better than
> what you found.

"texdoc comprehensive" does absolutely nothing here (well, other than
return me to the shell prompt).

> 
>     available in plain TeX-compatible format, 
> 
> BTW, if a font can be used in TeX at all, it can be used in plain.
> There is no such thing as a LaTeX-only font.  LaTeX is "only" TeX
> macros, after all.

I meant "as opposed to a font intended for some completely different
purpose"; i.e., basically something without .tfm files. Sorry for the
ambiguity.

I know that for a font wizard like you, almost anything is plain-TeX
compatible. For mere mortals (in my case, very mortal) who have never
mastered the intricacies of fontinst, virtual fonts, etc., basically we
need a package that simply installs and works :-)

  Doc

-- 
Web:  http://www.sff.net/people/N7DR

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 260 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://tug.org/pipermail/texhax/attachments/20090422/112f1400/attachment.bin