Message-Id: <9302040926.AA23372@sc.zib-berlin.dbp.de>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de>
Date:         Thu, 4 Feb 93 10:24:27 +0100
From: rolf.lindgren@USIT.UIO.NO
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de>
To: Multiple Recipients of <LATEX-L@vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de>
Subject:      Re: document classes & numbering systems
Status: R


Don Hosek writes:
 > changing the \documentstyle cannot do everything for us. It won't
 > change a text which is written using the US style of
 >   ``this.''
 > to Viking Penguin's house requirement of
 >   `this'.
 > (note change in quotes and movement of period). Or consider the
 > fact that grammatical statements which make sense with one

For Norwegian typesetting, I once hacked a virtual font that gave << and
>> in response to `` and ''. This gave the user the benefit of not having
to alter his accustomed LaTeX writing style but still achieving correct
typography, given the context.

Creating virtual fonts that give ` and ' in response to `` and '' is no
harder, likewise creating a virtual font that gives .' as response to ''.
It's just a matter of hacking the proper ligatures into the font.

This way, documents can be typeset for a variety of publishing traditions
given macro packages that call the correct fonts, no matter the document
style.

But how would people feel about considering this kind of thing as font
properties rather than document style properties?