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 f4EGPSf24618 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:25:28 +0200 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f4EGPR722376 . for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:25:27 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 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 f4EGPR013771 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:25:27 +0200 (MET DST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0DC92.7C974C00" 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 SAA22228 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:25:27 +0200 (MEST) 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 f4EGPQ013765 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:25:26 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <12.7BBB50F7@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:23:48 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 496217 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:25:23 +0200 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 SAA18437 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:25:22 +0200 (MET DST) 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 SAA25006 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:25:22 +0200 Received: from abel.math.umu.se (abel.math.umu.se [130.239.20.139]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f4EGPKQ17945 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:25:20 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.239.20.144] (mac144.math.umu.se [130.239.20.144]) by abel.math.umu.se (8.9.2/8.9.2) with ESMTP id SAA10823 for ; Mon, 14 May 2001 18:22:02 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: Return-Path: X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se x-mime-autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id SAA18441 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary 2.2 Date: Mon, 14 May 2001 17:25:20 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Lars_Hellstr=F6m?= 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: 4065 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0DC92.7C974C00 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 17.34 +0200 2001-05-14, jbezos wrote: >No, no. A font can contain glyphs variants so that >the user can select that he wants (for example, >Greek lunate sigma and medial beta are included in >several fonts, as well as simplied and traditional >Chinese ideograms). They are completely different >glyphs, even if they represent the same char; note >that many of them are included in Unicode only for >compatibility and their use is discouraged. For the base fonts I agree this makes sense, but for top level fonts = (i.e., the ones which TeX/Omega actually works with) it is mainly a nuisance. = It also goes against much of the philosophy in LaTeX as you end up with for each character separately specifying what it should look like rather = than what it logically is. >> You have to encode the hyphenation patterns somehow. As Unicode will = cover >> all known scripts it can be used as a universal encoding. Furthermore = I >> thought that there were OCPs (acting approximately at \shipout time) = that >> converted from Unicode to the actual font encodings when they are not = the >> same. Is this not correct? > >But even so, the encoding used when hyphenating >is _always_ the font encoding. Now I don't understand. Are you saying that there is an OCP, but that it never changes anything? Lars Hellstr=F6m ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0DC92.7C974C00 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary 2.2

At 17.34 +0200 2001-05-14, jbezos wrote:
>No, no. A font can contain glyphs variants so = that
>the user can select that he wants (for = example,
>Greek lunate sigma and medial beta are included = in
>several fonts, as well as simplied and = traditional
>Chinese ideograms). They are completely = different
>glyphs, even if they represent the same char; = note
>that many of them are included in Unicode only = for
>compatibility and their use is = discouraged.

For the base fonts I agree this makes sense, but for = top level fonts (i.e.,
the ones which TeX/Omega actually works with) it is = mainly a nuisance. It
also goes against much of the philosophy in LaTeX as = you end up with for
each character separately specifying what it should = look like rather than
what it logically is.

>> You have to encode the hyphenation patterns = somehow. As Unicode will cover
>> all known scripts it can be used as a = universal encoding. Furthermore I
>> thought that there were OCPs (acting = approximately at \shipout time) that
>> converted from Unicode to the actual font = encodings when they are not the
>> same. Is this not correct?
>
>But even so, the encoding used when = hyphenating
>is _always_ the font encoding.

Now I don't understand. Are you saying that there is = an OCP, but that it
never changes anything?

Lars Hellstr=F6m

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0DC92.7C974C00--