Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([213.139.130.197]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:09:03 +0100 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id n2OK92sg031728 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:09:03 +0100 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.94]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id n2OK59m9017256 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:05:09 +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 n2OGBwSE001396; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:05:00 +0100 Received: by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 15.5) with spool id 221167 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:05:00 +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 n2OK508C011234 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:05:00 +0100 Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.177]) by relay2.uni-heidelberg.de (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n2OK4wrZ009220 for ; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:05:01 +0100 Received: from fischer (p5B2A56AF.dip.t-dialin.net [91.42.86.175]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu1) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MKv1o-1LmCro3GvT-000kAy; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:04:57 +0100 User-Agent: 40tude_Dialog/2.0.15.41de MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <11ECEE9E-C040-44DF-9D1F-97281D9128ED@gmail.com> <49C8B459.5050201@telecom-bretagne.eu> <49C8C80B.3020504@elzevir.fr> <86eiwncer9.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <1jihxi26h837q.dlg@nililand.de> <86d4c7aqsq.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19acMp9xsOXTI6rUMuKxBaGvnX3ncwPsy7VDbi nGpk5+vATA2OurxJSQqxtgt6gsYs+ollmcbzWyPULzRu1uVYw/ 5QYvaIgnKqwjHuwoVxVrQ== X-Spam-Whitelist-Provider: Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:04:54 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Ulrike Fischer Subject: Re: inputenc for XeTeX and LuaTeX To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE In-Reply-To: <86d4c7aqsq.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 20:09:03.0138 (UTC) FILETIME=[609B2820:01C9ACBC] Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 5751 Am Tue, 24 Mar 2009 16:23:01 +0100 schrieb David Kastrup: >> Like Manual I don't think that it is a good idea to load >> xetexinputenc or luatexinputenc (or whatever the packages are >> called) through inputenc. This packages are currently at best in the >> beta-stadium. They haven't been tested much, the problem with >> auxiliary files with non-ascii chars generated by the engine hasn't >> been solved yet. >> >> inputenc and fontenc are base packages. They shouldn't load >> experimental packages which can change from one day to the next and >> where it isn't clear that they will stay. > > When the alternative is that they will just break, I don't see the > advantage. A lot of package don't work with some engines or need adjustments if you use another engine or driver. You can't use pstricks with pdflatex (meaning pdf output), fontspec gives errors when not used with xetex. But I don't see any requests to write a pstricks wrapper which loads e.g. pgf when used with pdf-output (and translate all the pstricks syntax). And the xelatex users handle the current situation with inputenc quite fine. On the other side changing inputenc so that it loads the new engine specific package introduce the danger of real breaks: the new packages are still unstable, "not robust" and perhaps buggy. At least in the case of xelatex bugs could affect real users. I don't have a problem to tell xelatex users (and later lualatex users) not to use inputenc because the package is (currently or for ever) not suited for this engine. But I at least wouldn't like to have to tell them to avoid the package because it loads behind their back buggy or incomplete or non-working or untested code. -- Ulrike Fischer