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 f1E068H29245 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:06:08 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1E068d03764 . for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:06:08 +0100 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 f1E062M06741 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:06:02 +0100 (MET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09619.EE231800" 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 BAA18351 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:06:02 +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 f1E061719558 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:06:01 +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 <8.BE29AE7D@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 1:05:53 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 487428 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:05:57 +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 BAA12157 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:05:56 +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 BAA24216 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:05:57 +0100 Received: from oxmail.ox.ac.uk (oxmail4.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.33]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1E05ug11833 for ; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 01:05:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from heraldgate2.oucs.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.2.50] helo=frontend2.herald.ox.ac.uk ident=exim) by oxmail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1) id 14SpSF-0001ck-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:05:55 +0000 Received: from max75.public.ox.ac.uk ([192.76.27.75] helo=spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk ident=rahtz) by frontend2.herald.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #1) id 14SpSD-0003VR-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:05:53 +0000 In-Reply-To: <14985.38673.90940.10236@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> References: <200102131350.IAA05912@hilbert.math.albany.edu> <14985.38673.90940.10236@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Return-Path: X-Mailer: emacs 20.6.1 (via feedmail 8 Q); VM 6.86 under Emacs 20.6.1 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: LaTeX's internal char prepresentation (UTF8 or Unicode?) Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 00:27:41 +0100 Message-ID: <14985.49901.719230.884652@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Sebastian Rahtz" 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: 3907 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09619.EE231800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Frank Mittelbach writes: > but it doesn't go all the way and I guess something like LaTeX still = has a > place in the game; so far I don't quite believe in XSL engines that = drive a quite. this is a criticism of XSL Formatting Objects, not XML or Unicode, which is the core consideration. > low-level formatter which is not capable of properly quering its = generated > typography data (something TeX(variant) systems can). I agree with you that this is desirable; and essential for certain types of design. but will you bet your whole kit and caboodle on those design features, at any price? Thats the dilemma *I* find myself in. And do I still use TeX? Yes, I do, every day, and hack macros in that ghastly collection of grunts Knuth called a language. But that's because TeX is a very stable, efficient, typesetting program capable of dealing with any document from a 1 page memo to a 25000 page telephone bill. NOT because TeX can interact with its generated typography data! .... (another message) ... > he is right though about one point: I'm very much interested in = concepts and > algorithms for high quality typesetting and think that TeX is a good = basis > to actually explore them. Strangely enough a lot of people still turn = to it > (LaTeX) when it comes to formatting XML and other documents. Us TeX people like to think this is so. Yet, in my daily perusal of XML-related publications, newsgroups and maillists, do I see any evidence? no, not much. Try it yourself. Go to the bookshop, open each of the XML books on the shelves (you should see 30 or 40), and look up TeX in the index. Search for the word "TeX" in the archive of an average XML mail group. Even IBM abandoned their strange TeXML, so far as one can tell. .... (another message) ... > remains to be seen. in the long term most likely yes, but how many of = the > people on this list can easily (in their favorite editing system) = edit or > generate a utf8 encoded file? hands up? since I only write English, I just write my ordinary file in emacs, and call it UTF8, and hey presto.. - so my hand is up. If I write in Portuguese, I write a file in iso-8859-1, and let the application transcode it to Unicode internally :-} its a doddle in Word, of course. I presume that is the favourite (sp.) of some people. Its a good editor in many ways. Sebastian ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09619.EE231800 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: LaTeX's internal char prepresentation (UTF8 or = Unicode?)

Frank Mittelbach writes:

 > but it doesn't go all the way and I guess = something like LaTeX still has a
 > place in the game; so far I don't quite = believe in XSL engines that drive a

quite. this is a criticism of XSL Formatting Objects, = not XML or
Unicode, which is the core consideration.

 > low-level formatter which is not capable of = properly quering its generated
 > typography data (something TeX(variant) = systems can).

I agree with you that this is desirable; and essential = for certain
types of design. but will you bet your whole kit and = caboodle on those
design features, at any price? Thats the dilemma *I* = find myself
in. And do I still use TeX? Yes, I do, every day, and = hack macros in
that ghastly collection of grunts Knuth called a = language. But that's
because TeX is a very stable, efficient, typesetting = program capable
of dealing with any document from a 1 page memo to a = 25000 page
telephone bill. NOT because TeX can interact with its = generated
typography data!

.... (another message) ...

 > he is right though about one point: I'm = very much interested in concepts and
 > algorithms for high quality typesetting = and think that TeX is a good basis
 > to actually explore them. Strangely enough = a lot of people still turn to it
 > (LaTeX) when it comes to formatting XML = and other documents.

Us TeX people like to think this is so. Yet, in my = daily perusal of
XML-related publications, newsgroups and maillists, = do I see any
evidence? no, not much. Try it yourself. Go to the = bookshop, open each
of the XML books on the shelves (you should see 30 or = 40), and look up
TeX in the index. Search for the word "TeX" = in the archive of an
average XML mail group. Even IBM abandoned their = strange TeXML, so far
as one can tell.

.... (another message) ...

 > remains to be seen. in the long term most = likely yes, but how many of the
 > people on this list can easily (in their = favorite editing system) edit or
 > generate a utf8 encoded file? hands = up?

since I only write English, I just write my ordinary = file in emacs,
and call it UTF8, and hey presto..  - so my hand = is up.  If I write in
Portuguese, I write a file in iso-8859-1, and let the = application
transcode it to Unicode internally :-}

its a doddle in Word, of course. I presume that is the = favourite (sp.)
of some people. Its a good editor in many = ways.

Sebastian

------_=_NextPart_001_01C09619.EE231800--