Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([213.139.130.197]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:23:49 +0100 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n2OCNnNF018504 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:23:50 +0100 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.94]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2OCKswA020215 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:20:54 +0100 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n2O8wjcQ001396; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:20:53 +0100 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 15.5) with spool id 218433 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:20:52 +0100 Received: from relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (relay2.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.210.211]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n2OCKqJi005447 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:20:52 +0100 Received: from mordell.elzevir.fr (mordell.elzevir.fr [92.243.3.74]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2OCKd6j019960 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:20:43 +0100 Received: from roth.elzevir.fr (thue.elzevir.fr [88.165.216.11]) by mordell.elzevir.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBBC535B9E for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:20:38 +0100 (CET) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by roth.elzevir.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id A71DBBFE3 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:20:37 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Mozilla-Thunderbird 2.0.0.19 (X11/20090103) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <11ECEE9E-C040-44DF-9D1F-97281D9128ED@gmail.com> <49C8B459.5050201@telecom-bretagne.eu> <49C8C80B.3020504@elzevir.fr> <86eiwncer9.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.0 OpenPGP: url=http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x50A89B42 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <49C8D015.1070205@elzevir.fr> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:20:37 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Manuel_P=E9gouri=E9-Gonnard?= Subject: Re: inputenc for XeTeX and LuaTeX To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE In-Reply-To: <86eiwncer9.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> Precedence: list List-Help: , List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Owner: List-Archive: X-ProteoSys-SPAM-Score: -4 () RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.65 on 213.139.130.197 Return-Path: owner-latex-l@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE X-OriginalArrivalTime: 24 Mar 2009 12:23:49.0905 (UTC) FILETIME=[6305D010:01C9AC7B] Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 5730 David Kastrup a écrit : >> I'm sorry but I disagree on this point. I don't think it is urgent to >> adjust the real inputenc. LuaTeX is still in early beta, so it should >> be used only by somehow experienced users, or at least users aware of >> what they are doing.. Such users should be able to understand that >> they should either encode their source in utf-8 (and don't load any >> inputenc) or load luainputenc. > > I disagree. The development or rather the update cycle of LaTeX is so > slow that we don't want it to impede progress. > No one (at least not me) wants to impede progress. luainputenc and xetexinputenc are interesting and I'm glad they are being developed. The question is: Would it be a real progress to have them called 'inputenc' (by whatever mechanism such as kpse search path or something like Élie's suggestion)? In the current state of the packages, I don't think it would be a progress to change the name to inputenc. And I also think there's no need to hurry deciding whether it is a progress or not. >> A important point is, people need to know the difference between what >> is stable and what isn't. They expect core packages maintained by the >> LaTeX team to be stable and work in a 100% compatible way. This >> expectation should be satisfied. > > I don't see how this expectation would be violated by extensions only > triggered by the use of something as experimental as lualatex. > Well, as a user, I usually expect things with the same name to behave the same. Currently inputenc and luainputenc just don't. If the user is aware enough of what's going on, she is probably able to understand that she should use luainputenc instead of inputenc (or, much better, (re-)encode her source as utf-8 and stop using *inputenc). Manuel.