Received: from webgate.proteosys.de (mail.proteosys-ag.com [62.225.9.49]) by lucy.proteosys (8.11.0/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id f1BFXcH11482 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:33:38 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1BFXbd25413 . for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:33:37 +0100 Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1BFXb713235 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:33:37 +0100 (MET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09440.00E1F500" Received: from mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.56]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA11072 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:33:36 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1BFXaM00893 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:33:36 +0100 (MET) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <2.D4A644AC@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:33:30 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 487607 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:33:33 +0100 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (mail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.234]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA20272 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:32:53 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id QAA43232 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:32:52 +0100 Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1BFWqu04135 for ; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:32:52 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.208] (helo=mrvdom01.schlund.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14RyUX-0006bG-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:32:45 +0100 Received: from manz-3e3645d3.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.69.211] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom01.schlund.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14RyUY-00029v-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 16:32:46 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id OAA11627; Sun, 11 Feb 2001 14:51:09 +0100 In-Reply-To: <14980.23750.628032.305093@gargle.gargle.HOWL> References: <200102091445.JAA00482@plmsc.psu.edu> <200102091643.RAA23818@mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr> <14980.23750.628032.305093@gargle.gargle.HOWL> Return-Path: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: hyphenation morass Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2001 14:51:08 +0100 Message-ID: <14982.39116.773341.877559@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Frank Mittelbach" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3795 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09440.00E1F500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Marcel wrote (under a different subject): > - Hyphenation tables should really be Unicode (so possibly UTF8 > encoded). They are logically neither input nor output encoding > related, and should work regardless whether either refers to a > castrated font set. true, but only logically. Within TeX (and that is the major basis right = now) it is tied to the font encoding that is the internal storage of the = table has to be in the font encoding it is targetting. this does not mean that the source input can't be in a more suitable = encoding and my suggestion is to use the LaTeX internal character representation = here (and not UTF8) but in some sense either is similarily useful since both describe in a unique way the set of characters and both can be converted = from one into the other. At this stage (at least) the advantage of the LaTeX's internal character representation is that it is well supported within the kernel and has a = far simpler parsing mechanism. It also has the advantage of being 7bit or = rather even visible ascii only (which is *still* a big advantage) but i will comment on that in more detail in a different message frank ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09440.00E1F500 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: hyphenation morass

Marcel wrote (under a different subject):

 > - Hyphenation tables should really be = Unicode (so possibly UTF8
 >   encoded).  They are = logically neither input nor output encoding
 >   related, and should work = regardless whether either refers to a
 >   castrated font set.

true, but only logically. Within TeX (and that is the = major basis right now)
it is tied to the font encoding that is the internal = storage of the table has
to be in the font encoding it is targetting.

this does not mean that the source input can't be in a = more suitable encoding
and my suggestion is to use the LaTeX internal = character representation here
(and not UTF8) but in some sense either is similarily = useful since both
describe in a unique way the set of characters and = both can be converted from
one into the other.

At this stage (at least) the advantage of the LaTeX's = internal character
representation is that it is well supported within = the kernel and has a far
simpler parsing mechanism. It also has the advantage = of being 7bit or rather
even visible ascii only (which is *still* a big = advantage)

but i will comment on that in more detail in a = different message

frank

------_=_NextPart_001_01C09440.00E1F500--