I have a xepersian document, e.g.

\settextfont{Nazli}% http://http.debian.net/debian/pool/main/f/fonts-farsiweb/fonts-farsiweb_0.4.dfsg.orig.tar.xz
این یک متن فارسی  است.
 متن فارسی...

Upon compiling I get these warnings:

LaTeX Font Warning: Font shape `EU1/Nazli(0)/m/it' undefined
(Font)              using `EU1/Nazli(0)/m/n' instead on input line ***.

and the text inside \textit{} is not italic. What is causing the problem? and how can I fix this?

I have used Nazli in LibreOffice and it has an italic shape; or isn't that the same?

  • I don't know Farsi, but is there a concept of italic characters in that language/glyphs at all? – user31729 Jul 30 '15 at 21:52
  • 3
    It's possible that LibreOffice fakes italic by slanting the letters. – egreg Jul 30 '15 at 21:53
  • @ChristianHupfer, Yes. I should have mentioned with FreeFarsi I don't have this problem. – Eliad Jul 30 '15 at 22:11
  • @egreg It must do. There is no italic in the package so far as I can tell. – cfr Jul 30 '15 at 22:12
  • 1
    Yes, as @egreg shows. However, the fact that it can be done does not mean that it ought to be done. Faked italics, like faked small-caps, are Evil. Font designers tend to feel quite strongly on this point in my (admittedly limited) experience. Italics are not slanted versions of upright fonts. Even oblique is not merely a slanted version of upright. At least, not for Latin scripts. For all I know, this might be perfectly fine in Arabic or Persian. Though I have my doubts. – cfr Jul 30 '15 at 22:24

Word processors like LibreOffice usually fake missing italic shape by geometrically slanting the glyphs. You can obtain the same result with XeLaTeX using the FakeSlant option to fontspec.

این یک متن فارسی  است.
 متن فارسی...

Probably 0.5 is exaggerated, but I used it for making the slanting more visible. The value should be negative in order to slant to the left.

enter image description here

| improve this answer | |

As shown here, the fonts contained in the package are four:


None of these appears to be a candidate for an italic version of Nazli. nazli.ttf is the regular, upright Nazli. nazlib.ttf provides Nazli Bold.

homa.ttf and titr.ttf are distinct fonts: Homa and Titr. These are not directly related to Nazli - they are just released by upstream as part of the same collection of fonts, and included in Debian's package because these, together with Nazli, are suitably licensed.

For more information about the Debian package see README.Debian.

| improve this answer | |
  • homa.ttf and titr.ttfaren't really related to Nazli. They are just in the same package. – Eliad Jul 30 '15 at 22:14
  • @Furihr Quite. That is why I said they are 'distinct fonts'. That is, of course, it depends on how you individuate fonts. But I hoped the contrast between those and Nazli/Nazli Bold would be clear enough. Can you suggest how I might clarify it further? Maybe I should just say 'and are not related to Nazli'? – cfr Jul 30 '15 at 22:19
  • @Furihr I've clarified a bit. Is that better? – cfr Jul 30 '15 at 22:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.