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 f54CDNf32379 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:13:23 +0200 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f54CDLp13563 . for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:13:22 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 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 f54CDLU00509 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:13:21 +0200 (MET DST) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C0ECEF.C0103380" 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 OAA07347 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:13:20 +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 f54CDK025796 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:13:20 +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 <0.AA15B2AA@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:11:08 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 496956 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:13:17 +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 OAA29530 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:13:16 +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 OAA193862 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:13:16 +0200 Received: from algonet.se (delenn.tninet.se [195.100.94.104]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f54CDF104543 for ; Mon, 4 Jun 2001 14:13:15 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [195.100.226.130] (du130-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.130]) by delenn.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.2) with ESMTP id 399435.656790.991delenn-s2 for ; Mon, 04 Jun 2001 14:13:10 +0200 In-Reply-To: <15120.57621.256542.391864@gargle.gargle.HOWL> References: <200105270954.f4R9sBI23611@smtp.wanadoo.es> <200105270954.f4R9sBI23611@smtp.wanadoo.es> Return-Path: X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se (Unverified) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: \InputTranslation Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2001 13:11:17 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Hans Aberg" 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: 4112 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0ECEF.C0103380 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable At 13:12 +0200 2001/05/27, Marcel Oliver wrote: >1. Store the full language context with every character token sequence > along the lines that Javier suggests. In other words, treat the > language context as part of the input encoding. It would seem that > if Frank's requirement for an ICR ("a single item must have a > unique and well-defined meaning") is to be met, it would > essentially mean that every character needs to be tagged for > language context. Perhaps I misread this as you are saying that every character should be stamped with language context: I do think that the language context should be everywhere present, = though, and that one should pick it up as early and conveniently as possible. = But I do not know how that should be done. Could one not classify all available (human) languages, as one in = Unicode attempts to classify all characters, and make that available as a code? = -- The number of languages should be much fewer than the characters. In = such a model, there will be a generic language code corresponding to old TeX. Hans Aberg ------_=_NextPart_001_01C0ECEF.C0103380 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: \InputTranslation

At 13:12 +0200 2001/05/27, Marcel Oliver wrote:
>1. Store the full language context with every = character token sequence
>   along the lines that Javier = suggests.  In other words, treat the
>   language context as part of the = input encoding.  It would seem that
>   if Frank's requirement for an ICR = ("a single item must have a
>   unique and well-defined = meaning") is to be met, it would
>   essentially mean that every = character needs to be tagged for
>   language context.

Perhaps I misread this as you are saying that every = character should be
stamped with language context:

I do think that the language context should be = everywhere present, though,
and that one should pick it up as early and = conveniently as possible. But I
do not know how that should be done.

Could one not classify all available (human) = languages, as one in Unicode
attempts to classify all characters, and make that = available as a code? --
The number of languages should be much fewer than the = characters. In such a
model, there will be a generic language code = corresponding to old TeX.

  Hans Aberg

------_=_NextPart_001_01C0ECEF.C0103380--