X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1428" "Thu" "4" "March" "1999" "23:19:23" "+0100" "Frank Mittelbach" "frank.mittelbach@UNI-MAINZ.DE" nil "33" "Re: some thoughts on glyph collections" "^Date:" nil nil "3" nil "some thoughts on glyph collections" nil nil nil] nil) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA08952; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:45:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <1.86FE61FB@listserv.gmd.de>; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:45:21 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 428310 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:45:20 +0100 Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (root@trudi.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.159]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA27148 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:45:19 +0100 (MET) Received: from istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (dialin414.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.175.114]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA09080 for ; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:45:17 +0100 (MET) Received: (from design@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) id XAA02007; Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:19:23 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: design set sender to design@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de using -f References: <199903021825.TAA13628@mozart.ujf-grenoble.fr> <199902281535.QAA14126@mozart.ujf-grenoble.fr> <199903032215.XAA01431@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Message-ID: <199903042219.XAA02007@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 4 Mar 1999 23:19:23 +0100 From: Frank Mittelbach Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: some thoughts on glyph collections Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3268 Lars > (BTW Frank, I managed to get around the resetting of \escapechar that was > necessary in the version I sent you, so now I only grumble about it in the > Implementation section. I still think that NFSS changing \escapechar is a > bad idea though; not changing \escapechar would use less tokens.) the advantage of setting the escapaechar is that i know what its value is, right? which could differ and then i'm in deep shit (i think that was my original reasoning to implement it the way it is implemented) but i grand you that this is layered software and that part goes back to NFSS1 alpha (or pre :-) > Also, perhaps I should point out that what Frank called glyph collection > seems to be pretty much what I call encoding in relenc.tex, and what he > called encoding seems to be pretty much what I call coding scheme in > relenc.tex. yes indeed. do you agree that our names are better? point is what we call "glyph collection" and you "encoding" is a set ie something unordered (a collection) which is why i think calling it encoding is confusing the issues as in my book encoding means associate a mapping with a set. right? example: the glyphs in a ps font (ie those in the AFM file some of which are compositive) form a collection (you call it encoding) and the encoding vector defines an encoding (ie the subset + its mapping to numbers) that can be actually used (you call it coding scheme) frank