Skip to main content
TeX - LaTeX

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

Required fields*

5
  • Thanks for the extensive explanation! To be honest, I don't know if "want" to use the OpenType math font. It was my misconception that it is designed to be used for all usages of bold math. I didn't know that there is a block for bold math symbols in the "non bold" font. If I understood your answer correctly, there is nothing wrong with using\symbf for bold math symbols even though it does not use the bold math font. Is that right`? Commented Apr 25, 2022 at 13:56
  • Visually, I can't tell a difference between using \symbf and \boldsymbol. But the bold font is embedded in the pdf when using the latter. Commented Apr 25, 2022 at 14:02
  • 1
    @marv It’s very likely that the bold Lucida math font and the bold symbols in the regular-weight Lucida math font use the same glyphs. One difference is that that there are bold symbols other than alphanumerics in the bold font. So, \boldmath{\hat{v}} works but \symbf{\hat{x}} doesn’t. Commented Apr 25, 2022 at 15:46
  • Sorry, but the short answer is wrong. See my comment to the question and the picture. Commented Apr 25, 2022 at 17:05
  • @egreg It depends on whether you 1: want to use semibold weight instead of the default bold weight of \symbf, and 2: want the weight of the hat accent to match that of the characters beneath. If the desired output is what you posted in the picture, the original MWE does not need to be changed, as you say. Commented Apr 25, 2022 at 17:23