X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1124" "Mon" "16" "June" "1997" "18:35:50" "+0100" "Philip Taylor (RHBNC)" "CHAA006@VMS.RHBNC.AC.UK" nil "22" "Re: Multilingual TeX --- and a successor to TeX" "^Date:" nil nil "6" nil nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP id TAA12768; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:35:05 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <12.D9E1DE80@listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:35:03 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 154376 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:34:56 +0200 Received: from vms.rhbnc.ac.uk (alpha1.rhbnc.ac.uk [134.219.201.113]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.7.6/8.7.4) with SMTP id TAA17225 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:34:50 +0200 (MET DST) Message-ID: <970616183550.3e47@vms.rhbnc.ac.uk> Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 18:35:50 +0100 From: "Philip Taylor (RHBNC)" Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: Multilingual TeX --- and a successor to TeX Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2059 >> > And is e-TeX or Omega having in plans to implement this? >> > Why other TeX implementation did not implemented this? It seems to >> > be not too hard. :-( >> Do it! Contribute a change file to web2c! Omega does not need this---it >> uses a completely different approach: it use so-called Omega Translation >> Processes (OTPs) which are final automata to translate input encodings, >> apply correct casification etc. A change file for web2c will not help for e-TeX; the latter is implemented as a changefile to TeX.web for reasons of portability, so an additional (codepage) changefile for web2c would only add codepage functionality to e-TeX implementations which use web2c as their basis. We discussed code pages at great length during an e-TeX meeting in Germany, and I have to say we failed to reach a satisfactory conclusion: if we are going to implement code pages, we would like to do so properly (which is not to say that Eberhard's aren't useful; we simply feel they don't go far enough), and despite several hours of debate we were unable to agree exactly what "properly" means in this context... ** Phil.