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 f1CCAY918458 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:34 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1CCAYd29030 . for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:34 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C094EC.CD10D900" Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1CCAXM29393 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:33 +0100 (MET) Received: from mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.57]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA07443 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:32 +0100 (MET) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1CCAW712076 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <6.9E52B95F@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:21 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 488039 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:22 +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 NAA05293 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:21 +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 NAA45540 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:19 +0100 Received: from nag.co.uk (openmath.nag.co.uk [62.232.54.144]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1CCAEu08203 for ; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:10:15 +0100 (MET) Received: (from davidc@localhost) by nag.co.uk (AIX4.2/UCB 8.7/8.7) id MAA18566; Mon, 12 Feb 2001 12:09:43 GMT In-Reply-To: (message from Roozbeh Pournader on Mon, 12 Feb 2001 15:25:31 +0330) References: Return-Path: Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: LaTeX's internal char prepresentation (UTF8 or Unicode?) Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2001 13:09:43 +0100 Message-ID: <200102121209.MAA18566@nag.co.uk> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "David Carlisle" 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: 3845 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C094EC.CD10D900 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > That's the reason Omega OTPs exist. Yes but I meant possibilities while working over standard TeX. (except for case 3, which was not to use TeX) > BTW, it seems that I have turned into a fan of Omega, without any big > experince with it, I've only played. But that is part of the problem. Omega is a big win if you are typesetting languages that need it. But that isn't the the only consideration if considering moving LaTeX as a system. LaTeX needs a stable base (probably more stable than John and Yannis can provide, as they understandably need to experiment with features as they push Omega further in the direction they want to go) and even if Omega was completely stable, one would have to consider whether it is time to try to move the majority of latex users off tex-the-program. I suspect that that time has _not_ yet come. I think it will come, and a unicode-omega-etex-pdftex-xml successor to tex will emerge but until it does, the LaTeX distribution needs to take a cautious approach. Individuals (including latex maintainers:-) can experiment with various TeX extensions and see if the features offered work for them, but LaTeX can not swap and change at will, making the change will take a lot of careful documentation and persuasion of the user base. If we jump too soon and land on the wrong boat, we'll sink. David ------_=_NextPart_001_01C094EC.CD10D900 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: LaTeX's internal char prepresentation (UTF8 or = Unicode?)

> That's the reason Omega OTPs exist.
Yes but I meant possibilities while working over = standard TeX.
(except for case 3, which was not to use TeX)

> BTW, it seems that I have turned into a fan of = Omega, without any big
> experince with it, I've only played.

But that is part of the problem. Omega is a big win if = you are
typesetting languages that need it. But that isn't = the the only
consideration if considering moving LaTeX as a = system.

LaTeX needs a stable base (probably more stable than = John and Yannis
can provide, as they understandably need to = experiment with features as
they push Omega further in the direction they want to = go) and even if
Omega was completely stable, one would have to = consider whether it is
time to try to move the majority of latex users off = tex-the-program.
I suspect that that time has _not_ yet come. I think = it will come,
and a unicode-omega-etex-pdftex-xml successor to tex = will emerge but
until it does, the LaTeX distribution needs to take a = cautious approach.
Individuals (including latex maintainers:-) can = experiment with various
TeX extensions and see if the features offered work = for them, but LaTeX
can not swap and change at will, making the change = will take a lot of
careful documentation and persuasion of the user = base. If we jump too
soon and land on the wrong boat, we'll sink.

David

------_=_NextPart_001_01C094EC.CD10D900--