1-Oct-2000 18:10:23-GMT,7130;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA11604 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 12:10:22 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA22320; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 20:09:02 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA09664; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 20:07:21 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 471545 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 20:07:20 +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 UAA09656 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 20:07:19 +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 UAA18340 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 20:07:19 +0200 Received: from mailgateway1.uni-freiburg.de (mailgateway1.uni-freiburg.de [132.230.1.6]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with SMTP id UAA22068 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 20:07:19 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from remote142-165.home.uni-freiburg.de [132.230.142.165] by mailgateway1.uni-freiburg.de with smtp (Exim 1.82 #3) id 13fnW9-0002lO-00; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 20:07:18 +0200 X-Sender: oberdiek@localhost X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (16) References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: <3.0.1.16.20001001195836.29c7f69c@localhost> Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 19:58:36 +0200 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Heiko Oberdiek Subject: Re: hyperref To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14803.54227.259547.782919@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> At 21:32 28.09.2000 +0200, Hans Aberg wrote: >It appears to me that the "hyperref" package ought to appear in the >"required" part of the LaTeX distribution: You are right in the importance of the "hyperref" package, but there are a lot of things that prevent this step at present. Sebastian has meantioned the main reason: At 00:27 29.09.2000 +0100, Sebastian Rahtz wrote: >I think its more fundamental than that, as discussed as far back as >1993 - hyperref does not fit into the model of LaTeX properly, and >rides roigh-shod over LaTeX innards when it feels like it. To add it >to "required" would imply that the kernel team felt that it reliably >collaborated with kernel packages, which would simply be untrue. For example the "required" "color" package is well supported by a lot of hooks in the LaTeX kernel: \color@begingroup, \color@endgroup, \normalcolor, \set@color, \color@setgroup, \color@hbox, \color@vbox, \color@endbox I found this commands 45 times in "latex.ltx", not counting the default definitions. Package "hyperref" would need a lot of more hooks, eg: * At the beginning of every page it wants to make a hyper anchor (\AtBeginDvi problem). * An official mechanism to extend the arguments that are used internally with \label and \ref: LaTeX uses two parameters, the formatted counter and the page number. Package "hyperref"/"nameref" adds three additional informations like the anchor name or the title of a sectioning command. * The figure model does not fit "hyperref"'s needs: Currently the anchor of the figure is made in the caption. But the caption is below the figure in most cases, so that if the user follows a link to a figure, he would jump below the figure and have to scroll in order to see the whole figure. Therefore the hyper anchor should be made at the beginning of the figure, for the anchor name the value of the figure counter of the next \caption command has to be known. But LaTeX2e allows zero, one, two, ... \caption commands in one figure environment. The rest of the hyper stuff has to be made at the end of the figure to get the whole rectangle. * Sectioning commands: It is very difficult and risky to define these commands, so that the hyper anchor is inserted before the sectioning title, but on the same page. Currently links to starred sectioning commands, followed by \addcontentsline point after the sectioning title. * ... >To do it right, bits of LaTeX need a rewrite, taking into account the >needs of hyperref. This is what Context has done, of course, >integrating the stuff into the kernel. I see no chance for LaTeX2e, because it is frozen, and I can understand the LaTeX people, which are now working on LaTeX3, that they do not want to rewrite the old LaTeX2e with the risk of introducing new bugs. Another reason: unresolved technical problems, the drivers acts differently: * In some situations a \leavevmode is executed, but not with other drivers. * The link margins are implemented differently (TeX level/PostScript level). * Some drivers support the "breaklinks" feature, other do not. I think, for a "required" state package "hyperref" should be more stable, not few bugs have to be fixed. The package is in development, so I want to rewrite the \Read/WriteBookmarks stuff in order to add additional features (the costs will be incompatibilities with older versions). >Also, hyperref should be split into two > > a) the package which provides hypertext functionality, acting as a > wrapper around driver \specials, and pdftex primitives > > b) the package which overrides standard LaTeX commands to add new > functionality to them, and interfaces with assorted packages Yes, a good idea, especially if a) can be made plain compatible, so that plain formats can benefit from hyperref (for example graphicx can be used with plain formats). It is a hercules task to define and describe the interfaces and to implement all of this. So that cannot be done until tomorrow for persons, which does not have the strength and power of hercules like me. Therefore I see it as an aim for the future (I have already begun to form modules, eg. the \pdfstringdef module, where the commands are defined together and marked with the prefix \HyPsd@). >I am fairly sure Heiko would agree with me on this Yes, of course, I always agree with Sebastian (at least in public) :-) Best regards Heiko 1-Oct-2000 22:01:37-GMT,2994;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA15486 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 16:01:35 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA10105; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:00:31 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA12100; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:00:17 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 471128 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 2 Oct 2000 00:00:16 +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 XAA12032 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 23:57:41 +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 XAA27502 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 23:57:42 +0200 Received: from csc.albany.edu (sarah.albany.edu [169.226.1.103]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA09793 for ; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 23:57:41 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from hilbert.math.albany.edu (hilbert.math.albany.edu [169.226.23.52]) by csc.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA02847; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 17:55:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from hammond@localhost) by hilbert.math.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA13711; Sun, 1 Oct 2000 17:55:34 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <200010012155.RAA13711@hilbert.math.albany.edu> Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2000 17:55:34 -0400 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: "William F. Hammond" Subject: Re: hyperref To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Chris Rowley writes: > What we have not done yet, due to `stafff shortages', is any detailed > work on building the requirements of multi-use documents (via hyperef > or any other pakage) into the new experimental work that I am sure you > are all right now busily testing. Is it correct to assume that "multi-use" in the context of LaTeX 3 documents refers only to (1) regular latex and (2) pdflatex? If so, is it agreed that broader senses of "multi-use" would stretch LaTeX, the language (as it will be in LaTeX 3), too far? Thanks. -- Bill 4-Oct-2000 6:21:50-GMT,4230;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA29006 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 00:21:48 -0600 (MDT) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA07710; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:20:16 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA13666; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:19:06 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 471232 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:19:05 +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 IAA13659 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:19:04 +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 IAA18086 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:19:05 +0200 Received: from nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (nets5.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.144.13]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA07568 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:19:04 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (campino.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.116.240]) by nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (8.10.1/8.10.1/5) with ESMTP id e946J4M01690 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:19:04 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE (diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.53.45]) by campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (8.9.1a/8.9.1/3) with ESMTP id IAA24182 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:19:04 +0200 (MET DST) X-Sender: blume@diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 07:50:48 +0200 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Achim Blumensath Subject: Re: proto-type of new output routine available To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14739.48861.489686.131120@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Hello, On Fri, 11 Aug 2000, Frank Mittelbach wrote: > > hope you don't find too many bugs with it I found a `feature' which might qualify as a bug. The routine \make@page@box which constructs the final page produces a box with zero dimensions. This results in the DVI file saying that the maximal horizontal and vertical dimensions are zero. At least my DVI viewer under BeOS gets confused by this. > - If the design allows strange placements in various areas, then ".lot" > files etc will as a result always be ordered strangely. There is > not much you can do about that on this stage (even if the above > problem is fixed) other than ensuring that at some later stage such > files get sorted automatically. If you need a TeX implementation of merge-sort you can take a look at the unfinished index package on my homepage. Achim -- ________________________________________________________________________ | \_____/ | Achim Blumensath \O/ \___/\ | Mathematische Grundlagen der Informatik =o= \ /\ \| www-mgi.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~blume /"\ o----| ____________________________________________________________________\___| 13-Nov-2000 17:56:38-GMT,13256;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA20053 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 10:56:36 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA27115; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:23:16 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA17377; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:22:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478666 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:22:14 +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 SAA17370 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:22:13 +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 SAA23966 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:22:12 +0100 Received: from abel.math.umu.se (abel.math.umu.se [130.239.20.139]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA26811 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:22:12 +0100 (MET) 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 SAA12913 for ; Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:21:29 +0100 (CET) X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id SAA17371 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2000 18:22:02 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Subject: Editing galley contents To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Lately I've been working on a set of macros which edit the contents of a galley vertical list; in particular they remove some and add other things to the lines of a paragraph that has already been broken. So far I have only used this for the paragraphs of a macrocode-like environment which additionally tries to break codelines that are too long to fit on one printed line, but now it occurs to me that this mechanism might be useful in more general contexts. Environments like macrocode are convenient in that one can have full control over which commands get executed and thus also full control over what gets put in the vertical list; in particular one can ensure that only removeable items (such as boxes, penalties, and glue; kerns are oc course also removeable, but TeX doesn't automatically insert these so I might just as well forbid them as well) appear on the vertical list. This means that I can use a \lastbox recursion (similar to that of the \removehboxes macro on p. 399 of The TeXbook) to pop all boxes (lines) off the vlist and then do something to them before I put them back. In the present case this "do something" consists of appending a backslash to each line and possibly changing the justification. (A backslash at the end of a line escapes the following newline, which would otherwise have been a command separator, in the language I want to typeset code from.) Of course this means one has to start a new vbox to do these tricks in since material cannot be removed from the main vertical list and one has to be careful about the \prevdepth and a couple of other things, but those are minor technicalities. I have included a code example in an appendix below, just in case anyone is interested. Outside such special environments things are less nice, since the user can insert non-removable material anywhere between the lines of a paragraph using for example \mark or \insert; one would have to go to great lengths to ensure nothing of this kind will appear between the lines of the paragraph. What makes all this relevant to LaTeX-L however is that LaTeX2e* already does quite a lot to control what gets put on the vertical list, so in a fully developed 2e* system it might not be that hard to impose the condition that the contents of a galley should be removable/editable. It is probably too much to ask for direct support in the kernel (or is that kernel packages?), but perhaps some kind of interface for mechanisms like the one described above could be offered? (That's the main point in this letter, just in case anyone wonders.) There are two more things which might need pointing out. The first is that the prohibition of non-removable items in the vertical list that is to be edited does not prohibit them from being there in the edited vertical list; the trick is to hide them inside a vbox which is unboxed when the edited material is put back on the list. Thus instead of saying \mark{} somewhere in the paragraph one might say \vadjust{\vbox{\mark{}}}. The second is that there is an application in "real" typography of editing the contents of galleys. In Omega there are two primitives \localleftbox and \localrightbox which insert fixed-width material to the right and left respectively of the lines of a paragraph; this is employed for quoted material in French typography. With editing of galley contents one could instead insert that material after the paragraph is broken, no matter what kind of breakpoint is chosen (if all breakpoints in the quote are explicitly specified then it is of course much easier to use \discretionary), but one also has to determine the shape of the paragraph minus this inserted material (this can be done automatically too, but it might require breaking the paragraph several times). It is certainly not as elegant as in Omega, but it _can_ be done with a standard TeX. Lars Hellström PS: I'm still waiting for the reaction to my letter on xparse of 2000/08/03. APPENDIX: Code example of macros that edit galley contents. % \begin{macro}{\TD@reformat@lines} % The |\TD@reformat@lines| macro calls itself recursively to reformat % all lines on the current vertical list. The first line will remain % flush left, but all other lines will be reset flush right. The % visible material on the last line will be left as it is, but the % last box in all other lines will be replaced by a non-macro font % backslash. % % It is very important that the current vertical list is not the main % vertical list. % It is assumed that the current vertical list consists of a sequence % of \meta{box}, \meta{penalty}, \meta{glue}, with an extra glue item % at the top of the list. It is OK if some penalty or glue item is % missing. In case the list contains other material as well the line % reformatting may be stopped prematurely, but there is a trick that % allows one to put arbitrary material between the lines of the % reformatted paragraph: rather than doing e.g. % \begin{quote} % |\mark|\marg{text} % \end{quote} % in the paragraph, do % \begin{quote} % |\vadjust{\vbox{\mark{|\meta{text}|}}}| % \end{quote} % The |\vbox| will be recognised by the paragraph reformatting % mechanism as a container for vertical mode material that appears % between the lines of the paragraph, so it will simply be unboxed. % \changes{2.12}{2000/11/11}{\cs{vbox} containers for vertical % material are allowed between the lines of a reformatted % paragraph. (LH)} % % Each line's horizontal list ends with % \begin{itemize} % \item a box (which contains the space that is to be replaced by a % backlsash), % \item a penalty (at which the paragraph was broken), and % \item a glue item (the |\rightskip|). % \end{itemize} % % A tricky feature in the implementation is that the % |\bgroup|--|\egroup| nesting will be off by one. The |\bgroup| at % the beginning of a |\TD@reformat@line| will be matched by the % |\egroup| at the end of the |\TD@reformat@line| that the first one % calls! % \begin{macrocode} \def\TD@reformat@lines{% \bgroup \unskip \count@=\lastpenalty \unpenalty \setbox\z@=\lastbox \ifvoid\z@ % \end{macrocode} % The recursion had already decended down to the last line of the % paragraph, and it is now time to reformat it. % \begin{macrocode} \egroup \prevdepth=\TD@prevdepth \hbox{% \unhbox\z@ \unskip \unpenalty \setbox\z@=\lastbox \copy\TD@backslash@box }% \else % \end{macrocode} % Else there may be another line, and the |\TD@reformat@lines| recursion % must continue to descend. Upon return the box currently in box % register zero must be reformatted as a non-first line (flush % right) and it cannot be the last line in the paragraph, so it is % always correct to replace the last box by a backslash. % \begin{macrocode} \TD@reformat@lines \ifvbox\z@ \unvbox\z@ \else \hb@xt@\dimen@{% \hfill \unhbox\z@ \unskip \unpenalty \setbox\z@=\lastbox \copy\TD@backslash@box }% \fi \fi \ifnum \count@=\z@ \else \penalty\count@ \fi \egroup } % \end{macrocode} % \end{macro} % % \begin{macro}{\TD@reformat@par} % The |\TD@reformat@par| macro reformats all lines (they're supposed % to constitute a paragraph, but that isn't so important) in the % current vertical list. The restrictions of |\TD@reformat@lines| on % what may appear in the list apply. |\dimen@| is used to hold the % desired width of reformatted paragraphs. % % More precisely |\TD@reformat@par| takes care of the last line of % the paragraph and the possible |\vbox| containers for vertical % material that may follow it. Everything in the paragraph that comes % before the last line is handled by |\TD@reformat@lines|. % \changes{2.12}{2000/11/11}{\cs{vbox} containers for vertical % material are allowed after the last line of a reformatted % paragraph. (LH)} % \begin{macrocode} \def\TD@reformat@par{% \unskip \count@=\lastpenalty \unpenalty \setbox\z@=\lastbox \ifvbox\z@ \bgroup \TD@reformat@par \egroup \unvbox\z@ \else\ifnum \prevgraf>\@ne \dimen@=\@totalleftmargin \advance \dimen@ \linewidth \bgroup \unskip \count@=\lastpenalty \unpenalty \setbox\z@=\lastbox \TD@reformat@lines \hb@xt@\dimen@{\hfill \unhbox\z@ \unskip}% \else \unskip \prevdepth=\TD@prevdepth \box\z@ \fi\fi \ifnum \count@=\z@ \else \penalty\count@ \fi } % \end{macrocode} % \end{macro} % % \begin{macro}{\TD@prevdepth} % |\TD@prevdepth| is a macro which is used for storing the value of % |\prevdepth| at times where \TeX\ modifies this special dimen in % unwanted ways. It should always be set globally. % \end{macro} % % % \begin{macro}{\TD@begin@tclpar} % The |\TD@begin@tclpar| macro is called when a paragraph in a % \texttt{tcl} or \texttt{tcl*} environment is about to start. It % takes care of setting up things so that the paragraph can later be % reformatted using |\TD@reformat@par|, but it also has to make sure % that this reformatting doesn't affect the way the paragraph blends % in with vertical material before and after it. % % Reformatting requires that the paragraph is first built in % restricted vertical mode, i.e., it has to be built in an explicit % |\vbox|. A problem with this is however that it changes the value of % |\prevdepth|, which must therefore be explicitly restored. % \begin{macrocode} \def\TD@begin@tclpar{% \xdef\TD@prevdepth{\the\prevdepth}% \setbox\z@=\vbox\bgroup \color@begingroup \prevdepth=\TD@prevdepth \indent } % \end{macrocode} % \end{macro} % % \begin{macro}{\TD@end@tclpar} % The |\TD@end@tclpar| macro ends a paragraph begun by % |\TD@begin@tclpar|, reformats it (|\TD@reformat@par|), and % contributes it to the surrounding vertical list. The |\begingroup| % and |\endgroup| are there to sort things out in case the recursion % in |\TD@reformat@par| fails to match as intended. The second % |\@@par| sees to that the page builder is exercised (without it, % several pages may go onto the main vertical list without anything % being shipped out). % \begin{macrocode} \def\TD@end@tclpar{% \@@par \begingroup \skip@=\lastskip \TD@reformat@par \vskip\skip@ \endgroup \xdef\TD@prevdepth{\the\prevdepth}% \color@endgroup \egroup \unvbox\z@ \prevdepth=\TD@prevdepth \@@par } % \end{macrocode} % \end{macro} 14-Nov-2000 7:51:56-GMT,4646;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA10366 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 00:51:55 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA22015; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:42:31 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA24085; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:41:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 477755 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:41:56 +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 IAA24078 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:41:54 +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 IAA14892 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:41:55 +0100 Received: from nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (nets5.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.144.13]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA21731 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:41:55 +0100 (MET) Received: from campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (campino.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.116.240]) by nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (8.10.1/8.10.1/7) with ESMTP id eAE7fsm04783 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:41:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE (diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.53.122]) by campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (8.9.1a/8.9.1/3) with ESMTP id IAA19733 for ; Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:41:54 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: blume@diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id IAA24079 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 08:08:16 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Achim Blumensath Subject: Re: Editing galley contents To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Hello, On Mon, 13 Nov 2000, Lars Hellström wrote: > Lately I've been working on a set of macros which edit the contents of > a galley vertical list; in particular they remove some and add other > things to the lines of a paragraph that has already been broken. [...] > What makes all this relevant to LaTeX-L however is that LaTeX2e* already > does quite a lot to control what gets put on the vertical list, so in a > fully developed 2e* system it might not be that hard to impose the > condition that the contents of a galley should be removable/editable. It > is probably too much to ask for direct support in the kernel (or is that > kernel packages?), but perhaps some kind of interface for mechanisms > like the one described above could be offered? (That's the main point in > this letter, just in case anyone wonders.) One of the main things I dislike about the design of TeX is that one does not have direct access to the main data structures which makes it quite hard to do things like, say, adding line numbers. Thus, I would be really pleased if your suggestion is implemented. (Provided it can be done with a reasonable amount of work.) Achim -- ________________________________________________________________________ | \_____/ | Achim Blumensath \O/ \___/\ | Mathematische Grundlagen der Informatik =o= \ /\ \| www-mgi.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~blume /"\ o----| ____________________________________________________________________\___| 20-Dec-2000 12:54:32-GMT,3479;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA17970 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 05:54:30 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id eBKCmYU27220; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:48:34 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA21703; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:47:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478396 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:47:56 +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 NAA21696 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:47:55 +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 NAA32036 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:47:55 +0100 Received: from nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (nets5.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.144.13]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id eBKClsU26963 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:47:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (campino.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.116.240]) by nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (8.10.1/8.10.1/5) with ESMTP id eBKClsm18734 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:47:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE (diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.53.122]) by campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (8.9.1a/8.9.1/3) with ESMTP id NAA22922 for ; Wed, 20 Dec 2000 13:47:53 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: blume@diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 14:25:41 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Achim Blumensath Subject: templates for page layout To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Hello, I've written some templates to specify the page layout. The package can be found at http://www-mgi.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~blume/Download.html Comments are wellcome. Achim -- ________________________________________________________________________ | \_____/ | Achim Blumensath \O/ \___/\ | Mathematische Grundlagen der Informatik =o= \ /\ \| www-mgi.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~blume /"\ o----| ____________________________________________________________________\___| 31-Dec-2000 18:09:33-GMT,3697;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA16976 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 11:09:31 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id eBVHvXU21716; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:57:33 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA23778; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:57:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 477870 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:57:03 +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 SAA23771 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:57:01 +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 SAA19250 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:57:02 +0100 Received: from angel.algonet.se (angel.algonet.se [194.213.74.112]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id eBVHv1U21625 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:57:01 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 22579 invoked from network); 31 Dec 2000 18:57:00 +0100 Received: from delenn.tninet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.94.104) by angel.algonet.se with SMTP; 31 Dec 2000 18:57:00 +0100 Received: from [195.163.229.23] (sdu23-229.ppp.algonet.se [195.163.229.23]) by delenn.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.1) with ESMTP id 272117.285419.978delenn-s0 ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:56:59 +0100 X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id SAA23772 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 18:54:18 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Subject: Re: templates for page layout To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: At 14.25 +0100 2000-12-20, Achim Blumensath wrote: >Hello, > >I've written some templates to specify the page layout. The package >can be found at > > http://www-mgi.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~blume/Download.html > >Comments are wellcome. Looks nice. [NB: I haven't got the page with me right now, so I might remember some of the following incorrectly. Anyway:] I especially like the golden ratio template, but shouldn't one determine the text height from the width rather than the other way around? The main unresolved problem (which probably should be handled in connection to the page layout) is however how the text height and main galley height should be related (I have written about that before), but I you would need support from the output routine to sort that one out. Lars Hellström 31-Dec-2000 21:10:36-GMT,3567;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA20066 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 14:10:35 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id eBVL2bU08289; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 22:02:37 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA24416; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 22:02:23 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 477893 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 22:02:22 +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 WAA24409 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 22:02:21 +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 WAA21128 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 22:02:21 +0100 Received: from csc.albany.edu (sarah.albany.edu [169.226.1.103]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id eBVL2LU08261 for ; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 22:02:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from hilbert.math.albany.edu (hilbert.math.albany.edu [169.226.23.52]) by csc.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA07540; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 16:01:50 -0500 (EST) Received: (from hammond@localhost) by hilbert.math.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA15231; Sun, 31 Dec 2000 16:01:48 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200012312101.QAA15231@hilbert.math.albany.edu> Date: Sun, 31 Dec 2000 16:01:48 -0500 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: "William F. Hammond" Subject: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L New Year's greetings to all. I've placed what I hope will be the last pre-release tarball at http://www.albany.edu/~hammond/gellmu/tarball.html. It represents what I've used to port the UKTUG LaTeX FAQ to an XML document that should eventually admit a number of useful formattings including the didactic HTML and LaTeX formattings that I am developing (albeit slowly). The FAQ port materials are at http://math.albany.edu:8010/pers/hammond/glf/ (a URI that eventually will move). The XML version of a GELLMU article does admit processing by James Clark's XSLT engine "xt". I would very much like to see a formatting to Texinfo so that the FAQ could be placed in info trees. I don't know Texinfo at all well, and my time is about to become scarce. An annotated sgmlspl skeleton for new formattings is in the referenced directory. One needs, in principle, 2 perl functions for each of ca. 120 tagnames. Or one could write XSLT. I would also like to see somebody translate it to TEI and then compare the HTML and LaTeX formattings obtained chez Rahtz from TEI with the native GELLMU formattings. -- Bill 1-Jan-2001 7:31:12-GMT,4679;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA24181 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 00:31:11 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f027QiU27102; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 08:26:44 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA05380; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 08:25:48 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 477821 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 08:25:47 +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 IAA05373 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 08:25:46 +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 IAA12688 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 08:25:46 +0100 Received: from nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (nets5.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.144.13]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f027PiU27046 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 08:25:45 +0100 (MET) Received: from campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (campino.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.116.240]) by nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (8.10.1/8.10.1/5) with ESMTP id f027Pjm21137 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 08:25:45 +0100 (MET) Received: from diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE (diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.53.122]) by campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (8.9.1a/8.9.1/3) with ESMTP id IAA10596 for ; Tue, 2 Jan 2001 08:25:45 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: blume@diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id IAA05374 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 2 Jan 2001 08:55:43 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Achim Blumensath Subject: Re: templates for page layout To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Hello, On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Lars Hellström wrote: > At 14.25 +0100 2000-12-20, Achim Blumensath wrote: > >I've written some templates to specify the page layout. > > Looks nice. [NB: I haven't got the page with me right now, so I might > remember some of the following incorrectly. Anyway:] I especially like the > golden ratio template, but shouldn't one determine the text height from the > width rather than the other way around? Well, I don't know what is more natural in practice, but since the height should be a multiple of \baselineskip while there are no restrictions on the width (except for an upper bound) I chose this direction. > The main unresolved problem (which probably should be handled in connection > to the page layout) is however how the text height and main galley height > should be related (I have written about that before), but I you would need > support from the output routine to sort that one out. Sorry, I can't remember what you've written about this. What is the difference between text height and main galley height? In my templates text height is the height of the text block without page head and foot but including footnotes and floats. Achim -- ________________________________________________________________________ | \_____/ | Achim Blumensath \O/ \___/\ | Mathematische Grundlagen der Informatik =o= \ /\ \| www-mgi.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~blume /"\ o----| ____________________________________________________________________\___| 4-Jan-2001 15:35:38-GMT,6232;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA01844 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 08:35:36 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f04FUFU12893; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 16:30:15 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA19066; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 16:29:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478336 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 16:29:29 +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 QAA19058 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 16:29:28 +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 QAA22022 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 16:29:29 +0100 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 f04FTRU12777 for ; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 16:29:27 +0100 (MET) 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 QAA00487; Thu, 4 Jan 2001 16:28:07 +0100 (CET) X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id QAA19059 Message-ID: Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 16:29:24 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Subject: Re: templates for page layout To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: At 08.55 +0100 2001-01-02, Achim Blumensath wrote: >Hello, > >On Sun, 31 Dec 2000, Lars Hellström wrote: >> At 14.25 +0100 2000-12-20, Achim Blumensath wrote: >> >I've written some templates to specify the page layout. >> >> Looks nice. [NB: I haven't got the page with me right now, so I might >> remember some of the following incorrectly. Anyway:] I especially like the >> golden ratio template, but shouldn't one determine the text height from the >> width rather than the other way around? > >Well, I don't know what is more natural in practice, but since the height >should be a multiple of \baselineskip while there are no restrictions on >the width (except for an upper bound) I chose this direction. The reason you should determine the text width first is that the width of a line is very important for how easy a text is to read: if the line is too long then it is hard to find the beginning of the next line. For many of the common paper formats (e.g. A4) it is more often this than the \paperwidth that is the bound you need to consider. >> The main unresolved problem (which probably should be handled in connection >> to the page layout) is however how the text height and main galley height >> should be related (I have written about that before), but I you would need >> support from the output routine to sort that one out. > >Sorry, I can't remember what you've written about this. See mail "Page layout parameters" (sent to the LaTeX-L list 31 Jan 2000). >What is the >difference between text height and main galley height? The text height and width are the side lengths of the text rectangle, in which all the non-marginal text should appear. In traditional book design, the size and position of this rectangle is one of the very first things you determine. The main galley height, or \vsize, is by contrast a parameter for TeX's page builder: the wanted height of the main vertical list material that is will be sent to the output routine in \box255. Current LaTeX makes no difference between these two concepts, but I think LaTeX2e* should. The main galley height is subject to various technical restrictions (when you're not \sloppy and the page hardly has any stretchability then you want it to be a multiple of the \baselineskip _plus_ one \topskip), but the right way to manage that is not to leave it as restrictions on the basic layout, instead it should be handled by some more technical set of templates which might for example round it as necessary. >In my templates >text height is the height of the text block without page head and foot but >including footnotes and floats. That's the way the current output routine does it, yes, but it is not the way it should be done. E.g. a headings pagestyle page head is visually part of the text rectangle and therefore its height should be included in the \textheight parameter. Another thing which should be included in \textheight is the (expected) depth of the page box; I doubt anyone would want to claim that the descenders on the last line of a page are outside the text rectangle, but that is how the current output routine puts them. The page builder ignores the depth when it determines the page break. One interesting advantage of putting the page head and foot logically inside the text rectangle is that one can (to some extent) ensure the main galley height satsifies the multiple-of-\baselineskip restriction by modifying the \headsep and \footsep. In most designs there is probably a range of acceptable values available. Lars Hellström 5-Jan-2001 8:01:29-GMT,6021;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA23883 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 01:01:28 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f057qpU14494; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 08:52:51 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA28745; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 08:52:01 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 477726 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 08:52:00 +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 IAA28738 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 08:51:58 +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 IAA24690 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 08:51:59 +0100 Received: from moutvdom00.kundenserver.de (moutvdom00.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.149]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f057q0U14388 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 08:52:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.208] (helo=mrvdom01.schlund.de) by moutvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14ERfL-0005rS-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 08:51:59 +0100 Received: from pd9502cce.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.80.44.206] helo=servus) by mrvdom01.schlund.de with smtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14EReL-0002S9-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 08:51:54 +0100 References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: <002601c076e3$ce2a3420$78e2fea9@servus> Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 07:50:19 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Ulrich Dirr Organization: Art & Satz Subject: Re: templates for page layout To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lars Hellström" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Sent: Thursday, January 04, 2001 4:29 PM Subject: Re: templates for page layout > >What is the > >difference between text height and main galley height? > > The text height and width are the side lengths of the text rectangle, in > which all the non-marginal text should appear. In traditional book design, > the size and position of this rectangle is one of the very first things you > determine. The main galley height, or \vsize, is by contrast a parameter > for TeX's page builder: the wanted height of the main vertical list > material that is will be sent to the output routine in \box255. Current > LaTeX makes no difference between these two concepts, but I think LaTeX2e* > should. The main galley height is subject to various technical restrictions > (when you're not \sloppy and the page hardly has any stretchability then > you want it to be a multiple of the \baselineskip _plus_ one \topskip), but > the right way to manage that is not to leave it as restrictions on the > basic layout, instead it should be handled by some more technical set of > templates which might for example round it as necessary. I think you should keep in mind the traditional meaning of the main galley. And a clear distinction between design concepts (parameters for book design) and typesetting (here: parameters for breaking the galley into pages) should be made. May be this could direct the view not only to one page or page spread ... > >In my templates > >text height is the height of the text block without page head and foot but > >including footnotes and floats. > > That's the way the current output routine does it, yes, but it is not the > way it should be done. E.g. a headings pagestyle page head is visually part > of the text rectangle and therefore its height should be included in the > \textheight parameter. Another thing which should be included in > \textheight is the (expected) depth of the page box; I doubt anyone would > want to claim that the descenders on the last line of a page are outside > the text rectangle, but that is how the current output routine puts them. > The page builder ignores the depth when it determines the page break. > > One interesting advantage of putting the page head and foot logically > inside the text rectangle is that one can (to some extent) ensure the main > galley height satsifies the multiple-of-\baselineskip restriction by > modifying the \headsep and \footsep. In most designs there is probably a > range of acceptable values available. For book design an empty running head or a footer with only the page count isn't part of the text corpus. But in other designs header and footers could be regarded part of. On the other hand they are completely (usually) uninteresting for typesetting the main body. Ulrich Dirr -- Art & Satz Ulrich Dirr Arnimstraße 9 81369 München Germany/Deutschland -- fon (+49 89) 743 30 60 fax (+49 89) 743 30 61 email ud@art-satz.de -- -=*:-) 5-Jan-2001 8:10:19-GMT,6083;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA24097 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 01:10:18 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f05861U20942; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:06:01 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA28884; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:05:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 477741 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:05:54 +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 JAA28875 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:05:52 +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 JAA14456 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:05:53 +0100 Received: from nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (nets5.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.144.13]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0585sU20816 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:05:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (campino.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.116.240]) by nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (8.10.1/8.10.1/5) with ESMTP id f0585qm17198 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:05:52 +0100 (MET) Received: from diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE (diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.53.122]) by campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (8.9.1a/8.9.1/3) with ESMTP id JAA15692 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:05:52 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: blume@diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id JAA28877 Message-ID: Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 09:33:59 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Achim Blumensath Subject: Re: templates for page layout To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Hello, On Thu, 4 Jan 2001, Lars Hellström wrote: > At 08.55 +0100 2001-01-02, Achim Blumensath wrote: > >> >I've written some templates to specify the page layout. > >> > >> Looks nice. [NB: I haven't got the page with me right now, so I might > >> remember some of the following incorrectly. Anyway:] I especially like the > >> golden ratio template, but shouldn't one determine the text height from the > >> width rather than the other way around? > > > >Well, I don't know what is more natural in practice, but since the height > >should be a multiple of \baselineskip while there are no restrictions on > >the width (except for an upper bound) I chose this direction. > > The reason you should determine the text width first is that the width of a > line is very important for how easy a text is to read: if the line is too > long then it is hard to find the beginning of the next line. For many of > the common paper formats (e.g. A4) it is more often this than the > \paperwidth that is the bound you need to consider. That's what I meant with `upper bound'. On the other hand, it doesn't matter much whether the text width is, say, 340pt or 345pt. Perhaps the ideal order would be, given a maximal value for the text width and the ratio height/width: text-height = (ratio * max-text-width) rounded to multiples of baseline-skip text-width = text-height / ratio > >> The main unresolved problem (which probably should be handled in connection > >> to the page layout) is however how the text height and main galley height > >> should be related (I have written about that before), but I you would need > >> support from the output routine to sort that one out. I think it should be optional whether page heads and foots contribute to the dimensions of the textblock. But in all cases the typesetting of the textblock should be done without them. Perhaps one could simply include two attributes head-height and foot-height and change the above formulae to text-height = round (ratio * max-text-width - head-height - foot-height) text-width = (text-height + head-height + foot-height) / ratio > One interesting advantage of putting the page head and foot logically > inside the text rectangle is that one can (to some extent) ensure the main > galley height satsifies the multiple-of-\baselineskip restriction by > modifying the \headsep and \footsep. In most designs there is probably a > range of acceptable values available. I don't think this is a good idea since it would result in the textblock having different positions/sizes on each page. Achim ________________________________________________________________________ | \_____/ | Achim Blumensath \O/ \___/\ | Mathematische Grundlagen der Informatik =o= \ /\ \| www-mgi.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~blume /"\ o----| ____________________________________________________________________\___| 5-Jan-2001 13:41:42-GMT,5431;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA29835 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 06:41:40 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f05DR6U12219; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:27:06 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA03991; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:26:36 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478123 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:26:36 +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 OAA03984 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:26:34 +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 OAA18628 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:26:35 +0100 Received: from zambeze.ujf-grenoble.fr (zambeze.ujf-grenoble.fr [152.77.2.3]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f05DQUU12105 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:26:31 +0100 (MET) Received: from mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr (mozart.ujf-grenoble.fr [193.54.241.5]) by zambeze.ujf-grenoble.fr (Pro-8.9.3/8.9.3/Configured by AD & JE 25/10/1999) with ESMTP id OAA24866 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:26:15 +0100 (MET) Received: (from bouche@localhost) by mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr (8.9.3/8.8.5) id OAA02251; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:26:12 +0100 (MET) References: X-Mailer: VM 6.22 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <200101051326.OAA02251@mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr> Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 14:26:12 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Thierry Bouche Subject: Re: templates for page layout To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: » The reason you should determine the text width first is that the width of a » line is very important for how easy a text is to read: if the line is too » long then it is hard to find the beginning of the next line. but designers don't (necessarily) work that way: you usually have the constraint of the paper format (or choose one in the first place), then choose the text width/height and adjust type size/leading to achieve nice text blocks. You can't say like in current standard classes `i want that font size/leading on that paper' and get a line length/textheight computed, because you'd adjust the leading depending on the line length, and the line length (together with type size) depending on the margins... » For many of » the common paper formats (e.g. A4) it is more often this than the » \paperwidth that is the bound you need to consider. it is more or less impossible to achieve a nice layout on iso paper anyway... » The text height and width are the side lengths of the text rectangle, in » which all the non-marginal text should appear. In traditional book design, » the size and position of this rectangle is one of the very first things you » determine. yes, and find a font/leading that fits afterwards... » That's the way the current output routine does it, yes, but it is not the » way it should be done. E.g. a headings pagestyle page head is visually part » of the text rectangle they're not! in fact it depends: when you have a rule under the heading, very close to the body of the text, you consider the heading as part of the text block, but usually, you don't. If you have folios at the bottom of the page, they're definitely out of the text block. I think Tschishold says something about that, but maybe I remember it wrong. » Another thing which should be included in » \textheight is the (expected) depth of the page box; I doubt anyone would » want to claim that the descenders on the last line of a page are outside I would. I mean that what designers choose (often with a cryptic combination of oblique lines) is the rectangle that will apear grey in a typical page: its top is a x-height (or cap-height) over the first base-line, its bottom is the last baseline. In TeX, topskips have to be quite large when you use accented caps e.g., but the real visual text blocks starts somewhat lower. Thierry Bouche __ « Ils vivent pour vivre, et nous, hélas ! nous vivons pour savoir. » Charles Baudelaire, Paris. 5-Jan-2001 20:08:26-GMT,4029;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA09679 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 13:08:25 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f05K44U26815; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:04:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA10572; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:03:37 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478527 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:03:36 +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 VAA10565 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:03:35 +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 VAA17872 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:03:34 +0100 Received: from knatte.tninet.se (knatte.tninet.se [195.100.94.10]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f05K3ZU26490 for ; Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:03:35 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 29725 invoked from network); 5 Jan 2001 21:03:32 +0100 Received: from delenn.tninet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.94.104) by knatte.tninet.se with SMTP; 5 Jan 2001 21:03:32 +0100 Received: from [195.100.226.148] (du148-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.148]) by delenn.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.1) with ESMTP id 537235.725010.978delenn-s1 ; Fri, 05 Jan 2001 21:03:30 +0100 X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 21:03:14 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Hans Aberg Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200012312101.QAA15231@hilbert.math.albany.edu> At 16:01 -0500 0-12-31, William F. Hammond wrote: >I've placed what I hope will be the last pre-release tarball at >http://www.albany.edu/~hammond/gellmu/tarball.html. ... >I would also like to see somebody translate it to TEI and then compare >the HTML and LaTeX formattings obtained chez Rahtz from TEI with the >native GELLMU formattings. If you are in the need of various translations, have you tried using Flex (lexical analyzer generator) and Bison (parser generator, or compiler-compiler), see ftp://ftp.digital.com/pub/GNU/non-gnu/flex/flex-2.5.4a.tar.gz ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/cvs/ -- I use them together with C++, which is convenient as the latter has standard string classes. One approach is to parse objects into something like the DOM (Document Object Model, http://www.w3.org/), and then onto that hook a program that can translate into several different formats. I have used a similar approach, not with respect to document formats, but for writing an object-oriented language that currently outputs C++ code. But I do not output a language text but a series of C++ iterated lookup tables, which via a special formatting file with suitable macro definitions, and a "formatter" program which knows how to pick together to produce C++ files as output. The approach dramatically simplifies the Bison action rules. Hans Aberg 6-Jan-2001 19:55:39-GMT,6015;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA07785 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 12:55:37 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f06Jq3U25164; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 20:52:03 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA26549; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 20:51:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478232 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 20:51:20 +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 UAA26542 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 20:51:19 +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 UAA27296 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 20:51:19 +0100 Received: from csc.albany.edu (sarah.albany.edu [169.226.1.103]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f06JpIU25087 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 20:51:19 +0100 (MET) Received: from pluto.math.albany.edu (pluto.math.albany.edu [169.226.23.44]) by csc.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA20445 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 14:50:41 -0500 (EST) Received: (from hammond@localhost) by pluto.math.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA03845 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 14:50:40 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 14:50:40 -0500 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: "William F. Hammond" Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Hans Aberg writes: > >... > >I would also like to see somebody translate it to TEI and then compare > >the HTML and LaTeX formattings obtained chez Rahtz from TEI with the > >native GELLMU formattings. Actually, I am more interested in getting a copy for Info trees than in a TEI copy. (And there is now an SGML version of Texinfo thanks to Daniele Giacomini that formats to Texinfo.) I guess I thought that TEI fans might bite. I also believe that a DocBook version would prove useful inasmuch as Docbook is used by the Linux Documentation Project. > If you are in the need of various translations, have you tried using Flex > (lexical analyzer generator) and Bison (parser generator, or > compiler-compiler), see Are you saying that it's easier to code translations from XML using lex and yacc descendants rather than using standard XML tools such as sgmlspl, jade, or xt? I find that hard to believe. (Of course, the situation before 1996 was different.) [snip] > -- I use them together with C++, which is convenient as the latter has > standard string classes. Although I've written in C, I've never gotten into C++. Are there good regular expression libraries for C++? > One approach is to parse objects into something like the DOM (Document > Object Model, http://www.w3.org/), and then onto that hook a program that > can translate into several different formats. Of course, sgmlspl, jade, xt, and other standard sgml/xml tools provide good frameworks for translating into as many different formats as one likes by writing, respectively, Perl, DSSSL, and XSLT. (Possibly also it would be viable to use David Carlisle's xmltex followed by Eitan Gurari's tex4ht in which case one writes TeX.) The power of sgmlspl (though not the speed) can match that of any method except possibly when one wants to descend into CDATA segments. But then if one finds one's self tempted^{1} to do that (as one might, for example, in typesetting with TeX or LaTeX the name of TeX or LaTeX or even the ASCII character '~' from an XML document type that does not provide these things as empties^{2}), one should instead customize one's XML document type. -- Bill Notes: 1. There is one reasonable situation where descent into CDATA *should* take place: math mode contents need to be thoroughly parsed in translation to MathML from a document type that mathematical authors will find tolerable. But there is no issue of that type in connection with http://math.albany.edu:8010/glf/lfaq.xml although, alas, one will find , , and . I wonder how some of these things would survive a double translation gellmu/article ---(hypothetical)---> TEI ----> LaTeX . 2. The default "article" document type for _regular_ GELLMU provides three character names for each of the 33 non-alphanumeric but printable ASCII characters. Each of those is at risk for some conceivable translation target. But an author may simply use one of these characters for itself when it is safe for both LaTeX and HTML. And, for example, by default the syntactic translator understands things like "\$" and "\{". If the syntactic translator's new internal verbatim (which becomes , a list-like thing) is used (by calling the front gellmu-verblist for gellmu-trans), then 32 of of these 33 names are auto-generated (';' is omitted) from literal verbatim. Something almost identical happens to literal inline material like |*~$\| if "manmac" mode is enabled . 7-Jan-2001 0:40:40-GMT,3932;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA13237 for ; Sat, 6 Jan 2001 17:40:38 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f070a4U10269; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 01:36:04 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id BAA28340; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 01:35:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478045 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 01:35:48 +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 BAA28333 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 01:35:47 +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 BAA28826 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 01:35:48 +0100 Received: from oxmail.ox.ac.uk (oxmail3.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.180]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f070ZmU10219 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 01:35:48 +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 14F3oJ-0001QM-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Sun, 07 Jan 2001 00:35:47 +0000 Received: from max85.public.ox.ac.uk ([192.76.27.85] helo=spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk ident=rahtz) by frontend2.herald.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #1) id 14F3oH-0003Qz-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 00:35:45 +0000 X-Mailer: emacs 20.6.1 (via feedmail 8 Q); VM 6.86 under Emacs 20.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> Message-ID: <14935.39414.219844.570581@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2001 22:19:34 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Sebastian Rahtz Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> William F. Hammond writes: > Actually, I am more interested in getting a copy for Info trees than > in a TEI copy. (And there is now an SGML version of Texinfo thanks to > Daniele Giacomini that formats to Texinfo.) I guess I thought that > TEI fans might bite. TEI fans just write TEI, I suspect.... > Are you saying that it's easier to code translations from XML using > lex and yacc descendants rather than using standard XML tools such as > sgmlspl, jade, or xt? I find that hard to believe. (Of course, the at a minimum, you have to get a flex patched to handle Unicode; it exists, but its not standard. you *can* write an XML parser in flex, as Richard Goerwitz has demonstrated, but its not trivial. > The power of sgmlspl (though not the speed) can match that of any > method except possibly when one wants to descend into CDATA segments. er, nonsense. sgmlspl provides no full access to the document tree, as DOM or XPATH do. you have to code it yourself, which is a bore. Sebastian "TEI fan" Rahtz 7-Jan-2001 15:06:58-GMT,3998;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA28166 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 08:06:57 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f07F3fU12144; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:03:41 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA03384; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:03:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478224 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:03:28 +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 QAA03358 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:02:56 +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 QAA24036 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:02:57 +0100 Received: from musse.tninet.se (musse.tninet.se [195.100.94.12]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f07F2oU12031 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:02:53 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 24274 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2001 16:02:35 +0100 Received: from garibaldi.tninet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.94.103) by musse.tninet.se with SMTP; 7 Jan 2001 16:02:35 +0100 Received: from [195.100.226.131] (du131-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.131]) by garibaldi.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.1) with ESMTP id 42267.879754.978garibaldi-s0 ; Sun, 07 Jan 2001 16:02:34 +0100 X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se References: <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:01:25 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Hans Aberg Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14935.39414.219844.570581@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> At 22:19 +0000 1-01-06, Sebastian Rahtz wrote: >at a minimum, you have to get a flex patched to handle Unicode; it >exists, but its not standard. Please give a reference (URL) to Unicode Flex. -- I am myself thinking of patching up Bison so that it can do Unicode parsing. The drawback with this approach is that it is more complicated to write regular words, but one anyhow has access to the more general LR(1) grammars that Bison can handle. >From the practical point of view, developing Flex and Bison synched together proves difficult, because they belong to different organizations: Bison is maintained by GNU with a public development policy; Flex by somebody else, and I have not heard of any public development of Flex for the last couple years. >you *can* write an XML parser in flex, >as Richard Goerwitz has demonstrated, but its not trivial. I would not use Flex for doing the actual parsing, only to recognize lexemes. Flex just recognizes regular words which can be turned on/off by some context switches (called "start-conditions").These Flex context switches are useful in connection with Bison, becuase one can use them to handle language context dependencies. Hans Aberg 7-Jan-2001 15:07:39-GMT,11417;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA28186 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 08:07:38 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f07F3fU12145; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:03:41 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA03364; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:02:58 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478221 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:02:56 +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 QAA03352 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:02:55 +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 QAA17628 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:02:56 +0100 Received: from angel.algonet.se (angel.algonet.se [194.213.74.112]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f07F2nU12030 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 16:02:52 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 14669 invoked from network); 7 Jan 2001 16:02:39 +0100 Received: from garibaldi.tninet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.94.103) by angel.algonet.se with SMTP; 7 Jan 2001 16:02:39 +0100 Received: from [195.100.226.131] (du131-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.131]) by garibaldi.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.1) with ESMTP id 757351.879756.978garibaldi-s0 ; Sun, 07 Jan 2001 16:02:36 +0100 X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 15:57:14 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Hans Aberg Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> At 14:50 -0500 1-01-06, William F. Hammond wrote: >> If you are in the need of various translations, have you tried using Flex >> (lexical analyzer generator) and Bison (parser generator, or >> compiler-compiler), see > >Are you saying that it's easier to code translations from XML using >lex and yacc descendants rather than using standard XML tools such as >sgmlspl, jade, or xt? I find that hard to believe. (Of course, the >situation before 1996 was different.) I do not know exactly what you want to achieve: I get the impression that you have an language of your own of some sort, and want to be able to translate it into different formats. If your language is just a dialect of XML, and there are XML parser generators available similar to that of Bison, then use that. The translation I needed was as follows: From my own language, I want to output C++ code. This proved very difficult, because local code generates information (such as include files, declarations, and definitions) that should be output in different places and files in the C++ output files. Therefore, instead of doing the parsing immediately into a new language, I invented an intermediate "formatting" language: Given a set of macro definitions, normally provided a formatting file (thus providing the specific data of the output language, in my case, C++), and a set of iterated lookup tables (in iternal binary format), produced by the parsing, it knows how to pick together suitable output files. The idea is to make the actual parsing as independent as possible of any output language, only producing the lookup tables. Then by merely switching the formatting file with the macro definitions, one can generate output to different languages. >> -- I use them together with C++, which is convenient as the latter has >> standard string classes. > >Although I've written in C, I've never gotten into C++. Are there >good regular expression libraries for C++? If you need full regular expressions and a full LR(1) parser within your language, then the simplest approach is to let your language output Flex .l and Bison .y files; then compile these files using Flex and Bison, and finally compile the files so output using a C++ compiler. This is sort of a standard computer technique: for example, the Haskell compiler GHC produces .c files in this way. Also note that Flex and Bison are themselves also compilers, and one can use Flex and Bison to write new versions of themselves. -- Actually, they do. :-) -- I only use C++ because it is convenient to produce an internal binary representation, which later can be used to produce the C++ output format. The iterated lookup tables I use are just map (meaning that one can index a finite set of variable by string keys) where "variable" is a class with suitable lookup information. Let's take a simple example: In the output in my application, I need to build a sequence of classes, which can have a sequence of methods, with definitions that should be output in various places. The main point is that one has a sequence of lookup localities, like in most modern computer languages. In my formatting file, I may have something like the stuff below: Here, <#header|...|header#> <#header|...|#> encloses a macro definition, and <|header_name|> is an invocation of the variable "header_name", and so on. <#header| #ifndef Synergy_<|header_name|>_header #define Synergy_<|header_name|>_header #if !__cplusplus #error Header file "<|header_name|>" only for C++. #endif #include #include "data" #include "construct" <|header_preamble|> namespace Synergy { <|class.declaration|> } // namespace Synergy #endif // <|header_name|>_ |header#> <#class.declaration| extern Synergy::data global_<|class_name:cpp|>; class <|class_name:cpp|> : public virtual construct { public: static const char* category; static object_method_base* lookup_method(const std::string&); static Synergy::data global; class object; typedef <|class_name:cpp|> constructor; virtual root* clone() const { return new Synergy::<|class_name:cpp|>(*this); } virtual bool cloneable() { return <|object_cloneable|>; } <|object_copy_to_clone_method|> virtual Synergy::data method_method(Synergy::data&); virtual Synergy::data method_object(Synergy::data& x) { return new object(x); } virtual Synergy::data method_object_method(Synergy::data& x); <|constructor_method.declaration|> <|constructor_cpp.declare|> class object : <|object_base|><|object_cpp_base|> { public: static const char* category; static object_method_base* lookup_method(const std::string&); <|object_constructor.declaration|> virtual root* clone() const { <|clone_method_definition|> } <|copy_method|> <|object_data|> virtual Synergy::data method_constructor(Synergy::data&) { return Synergy::global_<|class_name:cpp|>; } virtual Synergy::data method_method(Synergy::data&); <|method.declaration|> <|object_cpp.declare|> }; }; |class.declaration#> <#method.declaration| virtual Synergy::data method_<|method_name:cpp|>(Synergy::data&)<|method_is_abstract|>; |#> In my approach each variable can actually have a sequence of lookups attached to it, so it becomes easy to sequence a series of classes with the same template. Suppose that we want to format a class named `foo' with an object method named `bar' (among other data). Then the C++ code for that (the way I implemented it) would look something like // Create a new class named "foo": (*table)["class"][push_back]["class_name"] = "foo"; // Create a method named "bar" belonging to last created class ("foo"): (*table)["class"][last]["method"][push_back]["method_name"] = "bar"; The formatter then uses this lookup table with same kind of iterated localities like in say TeX, or any other modern computer language: When one prints out the "header" macro, when it encounters the "class.declaration" variable, it iterates through all classes using the "class.declaration" macro definition. Then, when in the "class.declaration" definition, when it encounters the "method.declaration", it iterates through all methods _in_that_class_. If a name is not found locally, it iterates towards the base to find a more global name. >> One approach is to parse objects into something like the DOM (Document >> Object Model, http://www.w3.org/), and then onto that hook a program that >> can translate into several different formats. > >Of course, sgmlspl, jade, xt, and other standard sgml/xml tools >provide good frameworks for translating into as many different formats >as one likes by writing, respectively, Perl, DSSSL, and XSLT. >(Possibly also it would be viable to use David Carlisle's xmltex >followed by Eitan Gurari's tex4ht in which case one writes TeX.) So actually, I do not parse into a language, but into a binary model, which has essentially the same general capacities (a local lookup system) of any language. Then I use another program to format that into a suitable language. > I wonder how some >of these things would survive a double translation > > gellmu/article ---(hypothetical)---> TEI ----> LaTeX . So what I use is something like this your "hypothetical" label here, except that it is not a language that I use, but a binary model, a sequence of iterated lookup tables. >2. The default "article" document type for _regular_ GELLMU provides >three character names for each of the 33 non-alphanumeric but >printable ASCII characters. As it is a binary model, such parsing concerns are irrelevant. For example, I wanted to write classes with _arbitrary_ binary string names, which does not work with C++, which only allows alpha-numerical names and underscore with some restrictions. But it is easy to mangle (encode) arbitrary binary string names, which I did by an addition to the formatter; then it is also irrelevant what kind of parsing I use in my original language to produce arbitrary binary string names. If one plays this game along, one ends up with developing a better and better intermediate binary model. For example, suppose I want to write a floating number. Right now, it would suffice to use say the C++ syntax, and parse them as strings which are output verbatim in the C++ files. But suppose I want to produce output to some languages with a different syntax than C++ in this respect. Then it would be natural to represent the floating numbers in some internal binary model, and add to the formatter the capacity to write out floating point numbers in different formats. Of course, my needs are specialized at OOPL -> OOPL language translations, and DPL ("document PL") translations may have other needs. Hans Aberg 7-Jan-2001 20:17:10-GMT,3279;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA03768 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 13:17:09 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f07K2cU27337; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 21:02:38 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA10391; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 21:02:20 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478311 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 21:02:19 +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 VAA10384 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 21:02:18 +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 VAA23904 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 21:02:18 +0100 Received: from oxmail.ox.ac.uk (oxmail2.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.1]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f07K2IU27036 for ; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 21:02:18 +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 14FM1B-0000yA-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Sun, 07 Jan 2001 20:02:17 +0000 Received: from max43.public.ox.ac.uk ([192.76.27.43] helo=spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk ident=rahtz) by frontend2.herald.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #1) id 14FM19-0005Sx-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 7 Jan 2001 20:02:16 +0000 X-Mailer: emacs 20.6.1 (via feedmail 8 I); VM 6.86 under Emacs 20.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> Message-ID: <14936.52564.841880.332015@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 20:11:00 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Sebastian Rahtz Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Hans Aberg writes: > At 22:19 +0000 1-01-06, Sebastian Rahtz wrote: > >at a minimum, you have to get a flex patched to handle Unicode; it > >exists, but its not standard. > > Please give a reference (URL) to Unicode Flex. ftp://ftp.lauton.com/pub/flex-2.5.4-unicode-patch.tar.gz see, I can use google too :-} sebastian 8-Jan-2001 9:46:59-GMT,3193;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA19201 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 02:46:57 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f089ZLU19478; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:35:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA19107; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:34:05 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478266 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:34:04 +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 KAA19100 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:34:03 +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 KAA15386 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:34:02 +0100 Received: from angel.algonet.se (angel.algonet.se [194.213.74.112]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f089XwU19224 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:33:59 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 21904 invoked from network); 8 Jan 2001 10:33:43 +0100 Received: from delenn.tninet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.94.104) by angel.algonet.se with SMTP; 8 Jan 2001 10:33:43 +0100 Received: from [195.100.226.144] (du144-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.144]) by delenn.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.1) with ESMTP id 486559.946419.978delenn-s0 ; Mon, 08 Jan 2001 10:33:39 +0100 X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se (Unverified) References: <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:25:31 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Hans Aberg Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14936.52564.841880.332015@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> At 20:11 +0000 1-01-07, Sebastian Rahtz wrote: > > Please give a reference (URL) to Unicode Flex. > >ftp://ftp.lauton.com/pub/flex-2.5.4-unicode-patch.tar.gz Got it. Thanks. >see, I can use google too :-} Great. (I tacitly assumed you wrote the patch yourself, had the URL on hand, or something, when I asked. :-) ) Hans Aberg 8-Jan-2001 15:28:07-GMT,3857;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA25503 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 08:28:05 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f08FJQU03655; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:19:26 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id QAA28751; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:18:19 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478845 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:18:19 +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 QAA28744 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:18:17 +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 QAA24660 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:18:17 +0100 Received: from csc.albany.edu (sarah.albany.edu [169.226.1.103]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f08FHoU03191 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 16:17:58 +0100 (MET) Received: from hilbert.math.albany.edu (hilbert.math.albany.edu [169.226.23.52]) by csc.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA23457 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:17:01 -0500 (EST) Received: (from hammond@localhost) by hilbert.math.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA03747 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:16:59 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200101081516.KAA03747@hilbert.math.albany.edu> Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:16:59 -0500 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: "William F. Hammond" Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Sebastian Rahtz writes: > William F. Hammond writes: > > Actually, I am more interested in getting a copy for Info trees than > > in a TEI copy. (And there is now an SGML version of Texinfo thanks to > > Daniele Giacomini that formats to Texinfo.) I guess I thought that > > TEI fans might bite. > > TEI fans just write TEI, I suspect.... Any DocBook fans? (A formatter from DocBook to Texinfo was begun by Dan Burton.) > > The power of sgmlspl (though not the speed) can match that of any > > method except possibly when one wants to descend into CDATA segments. > > er, nonsense. sgmlspl provides no full access to the document tree, as > DOM or XPATH do. you have to code it yourself, which is a bore. Well, overstated. After all, XML really wasn't "out" at the time Megginson's SGMLS.pm was last revised (Dec. 1995). Since it reads the SP ESIS and by conscious design does not build the whole document tree as a structure, there are some chores^{1}. But there are also tradeoffs. The power of Perl is a very good thing. It can be used to write very good LaTeX. (Whether the LaTeX that I'm writing with it is good enough for somebody else's standard is another question.) -- Bill Notes: 1. Actually, some of the chores can be avoided by following strategies that are not immediately apparent. 8-Jan-2001 17:12:30-GMT,9681;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA28502 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 10:12:28 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f08H5cU08254; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 18:05:38 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA01657; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 18:05:18 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 479128 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 18:05:17 +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 SAA01650 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 18:05:16 +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 SAA34784 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 18:05:17 +0100 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 f08H52U07779 for ; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 18:05:09 +0100 (MET) 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 SAA21451; Mon, 8 Jan 2001 18:03:35 +0100 (CET) X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id SAA01651 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2001 18:04:54 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Subject: Re: templates for page layout To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <002601c076e3$ce2a3420$78e2fea9@servus> At 07.50 +0100 2001-01-05, Ulrich Dirr wrote: [snip] >I think you should keep in mind the traditional meaning of the main galley. I wasn't aware there was one; I was using it in the sense of "LaTeX2e*'s equivalent of TeX's main vertical list". [snip] >For book design an empty running head or a footer with only the page count >isn't part of the text corpus. But in other designs header and footers >could be regarded part of. On the other hand they are completely (usually) >uninteresting for typesetting the main body. I know; in fact I wrote so in a mail to this list a year ago. At 09.33 +0100 2001-01-05, Achim Blumensath wrote: [snip] >That's what I meant with `upper bound'. On the other hand, it doesn't >matter much whether the text width is, say, 340pt or 345pt. Perhaps the >ideal order would be, given a maximal value for the text width and the >ratio height/width: > > text-height = (ratio * max-text-width) rounded to multiples of > baseline-skip > > text-width = text-height / ratio Perhaps so (the difference is of the order of about 1%), but does it on the other hand matter whether the ratio is 0.618 or 0.612? I would think changes in ratio are harder to spot. (Recall that 5/8=0.625 isn't uncommon as an approximation of the golden ratio.) >> >> The main unresolved problem (which probably should be handled in >>connection >> >> to the page layout) is however how the text height and main galley height >> >> should be related (I have written about that before), but I you would >>need >> >> support from the output routine to sort that one out. > >I think it should be optional whether page heads and foots contribute to >the dimensions of the textblock. Yes, not all kinds of headers/footers are part of the text rectangle (e.g. not a footer that only contains a page number). My point is that the text rectangle should be defined by a couple of basic layout parameters---\textheight, \textwidth, \topmargin, \oddsidemargin, and \evensidemargin say---and it should be possible to have the output routine placing headers and/or footers inside this rectangle. Thus the height and separation of header and footer (if they are to be set inside the text rectangle) would have to be subtracted from the text rectangle height when the \vsize (galley height) is computed. >But in all cases the typesetting of the >textblock should be done without them. I haven't suggested anything else. [snip] >> One interesting advantage of putting the page head and foot logically >> inside the text rectangle is that one can (to some extent) ensure the main >> galley height satsifies the multiple-of-\baselineskip restriction by >> modifying the \headsep and \footsep. In most designs there is probably a >> range of acceptable values available. > >I don't think this is a good idea since it would result in the textblock >having different positions/sizes on each page. No, it wouldn't! I'm not suggesting that the \headsep and \footsep should be made skips, put in the same vertical list as the contents of \box255, and that this list should be \vboxed to \textheight. I'm suggesting that the routine (template?) which computes the \vsize should be allowed to make small pertubations of the the values of the parameters \headsep and \footsep so that the main galley fits an integer number of lines. At 14.26 +0100 2001-01-05, Thierry Bouche wrote: >» The reason you should determine the text width first is that the width of a >» line is very important for how easy a text is to read: if the line is too >» long then it is hard to find the beginning of the next line. > >but designers don't (necessarily) work that way: you usually have the >constraint of the paper format (or choose one in the first place), >then choose the text width/height and adjust type size/leading to >achieve nice text blocks. You can't say like in current standard >classes `i want that font size/leading on that paper' and get a line >length/textheight computed, because you'd adjust the leading depending >on the line length, and the line length (together with type size) >depending on the margins... One of the nice things about the template interface is that even though all templates of a given type to some extent have to do the same thing, they can have completely different sets of parameters. I suspect some of THEM will have to conjure up a template for the standard classes which computes everything from the paper size and font size, but for more normal typography one would want templates more like those of Achim. BTW, thanks for pointing out that the leading (\baselineskip) is adjusted depending on the line width; I only had a vague impression that this parameter should be determined at some point after the line width was. >» For many of >» the common paper formats (e.g. A4) it is more often this than the >» \paperwidth that is the bound you need to consider. > >it is more or less impossible to achieve a nice layout on iso paper >anyway... True, but that is no reason to make a horrible layout. If you start by specifying the text height and ratio, it's much too simple to end up with an excessive line width by accident. [snip] >» That's the way the current output routine does it, yes, but it is not the >» way it should be done. E.g. a headings pagestyle page head is visually part >» of the text rectangle > >they're not! in fact it depends: when you have a rule under the >heading, very close to the body of the text, you consider the heading >as part of the text block, but usually, you don't. If you have folios >at the bottom of the page, they're definitely out of the text block. I >think Tschishold says something about that, but maybe I remember it >wrong. Something like that was what I wrote in my Jan. 2000 posting, yes. The point is that they can be part of the text rectangle, so the page layout parameters and output routine mechanisms should be constructed so that they allow this. >» Another thing which should be included in >» \textheight is the (expected) depth of the page box; I doubt anyone would >» want to claim that the descenders on the last line of a page are outside > >I would. I mean that what designers choose (often with a cryptic >combination of oblique lines) is the rectangle that will apear grey in >a typical page: its top is a x-height (or cap-height) over the first >base-line, its bottom is the last baseline. In TeX, topskips >have to be quite large when you use accented caps e.g., but the real >visual text blocks starts somewhat lower. OK, I'll rephrase that: I doubt anyone would want to claim that the descenders on the last line of a page are less part of the text rectangle than the ascenders on the first line of a page. The point is that the LaTeX2e parameter for this is asymmetric. In LaTeX2e* perhaps there should be some kind of 'overshoot' parameter which affects both the setting of \topskip (\approx 1ex + overshoot) and the setting of \maxdepth (\approx overshoot). Lars Hellström 9-Jan-2001 18:50:40-GMT,5413;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA07682 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 11:50:38 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f09IngU29076; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:49:42 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id TAA23401; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:47:43 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 479726 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:47:42 +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 TAA23394 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:47:40 +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 TAA26934 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:47:41 +0100 Received: from angel.algonet.se (angel.algonet.se [194.213.74.112]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f09IlfU28822 for ; Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:47:41 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 2336 invoked from network); 9 Jan 2001 19:47:39 +0100 Received: from delenn.tninet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.94.104) by angel.algonet.se with SMTP; 9 Jan 2001 19:47:39 +0100 Received: from [195.100.226.141] (du141-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.141]) by delenn.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.1) with ESMTP id 327019.66057.979delenn-s2 ; Tue, 09 Jan 2001 19:47:37 +0100 X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Date: Tue, 9 Jan 2001 19:43:50 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Hans Aberg Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> At 14:50 -0500 1-01-06, William F. Hammond wrote: >2. The default "article" document type for _regular_ GELLMU provides >three character names for each of the 33 non-alphanumeric but >printable ASCII characters. Each of those is at risk for some >conceivable translation target. I will describe the mangling technique I used for my own OOPL -> C++ translation, which avoids all such problems: C++ names (identifiers) are allowed to be alpha-numerical with underscores _, but may not start with a digit; in addition, names starting with an underscore, or containing two adjacent underscores are reserved for the implementation of the compiler. So, in order to make things simple, I started off in my OOPL with names only containing letters and underscores, with the restriction that names cannot start or end with an underscore or have two adjacent underscores. (Names in math normally do not contain digits.) For example, foo_bar is OK, but not foo__bar, _foo, bar_, or fo0. My idea is really that the _ ought to be a shorthand for a space, so these limitations seems reasonable. Then I wanted to extend this so that _any_ binary strings are allowed as names. I did this by allowing names within quotes ` and ', and using standard C-string conventions with backslash for special characters, and octal and hexadecimal character representations. The idea is also that say foo_bar = `foo bar' so that when foo_bar is parsed, it is given the same binary translation as `foo bar', which is the same as the C-string "foo bar" (minus the C terminating '\0'). Now, I want to create a C++ label for every such binary string: It is now irrelevant how I obtained this from the parsing in my OOPL. It is also irrelevant how I mangle the names, as long as I stick to the same mangling convention if different translation units should work together. If I change mangling conventions in the future, the old sources must be recompiled, but that is all. It is not so difficult to invent a mangling convention. In my case I decided that an isolated space, as in `foo bar' should be translated to an underscore, so that in fact foo_bar -> binary `foo bar' -> C++ foo_bar. If there are more spaces, or any other binary character, I merely write them out hexadecimally starting with a digit 0-7, and the second a digit 0-9 or a letter A-V. One also needs to prepend names with something, in order to avoid it starting with a digit (which I need to do anyhow, in order to put different categories of labels into different namespaces). This idea can then be used in many ways: If the output language only admits an infinitude of names, one can allow whatever names one wants in the input and mangling them into the output language. Hans Aberg 10-Jan-2001 9:12:29-GMT,4390;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA28904 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 01:42:10 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0A8b3U18918; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:37:03 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA29256; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:33:02 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 478752 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:33:01 +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 JAA29249 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:33:00 +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 JAA40240 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:32:59 +0100 Received: from nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (nets5.rz.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.144.13]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0A8WxU18222 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:32:59 +0100 (MET) Received: from campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (campino.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.116.240]) by nets5.rz.rwth-aachen.de (8.10.1/8.10.1/5) with ESMTP id f0A8Wwm28928 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:32:58 +0100 (MET) Received: from diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE (diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE [137.226.53.122]) by campino.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (8.9.1a/8.9.1/3) with ESMTP id JAA24429 for ; Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:32:58 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: blume@diabolo.Informatik.RWTH-Aachen.DE MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from QUOTED-PRINTABLE to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id JAA29250 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:58:01 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Achim Blumensath Subject: Re: templates for page layout To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200101051326.OAA02251@mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr> Hello, On Fri, 5 Jan 2001, Thierry Bouche wrote: > » The reason you should determine the text width first is that the width of a > » line is very important for how easy a text is to read: if the line is too > » long then it is hard to find the beginning of the next line. > > but designers don't (necessarily) work that way: you usually have the > constraint of the paper format (or choose one in the first place), > then choose the text width/height and adjust type size/leading to > achieve nice text blocks. You can't say like in current standard > classes `i want that font size/leading on that paper' and get a line > length/textheight computed, because you'd adjust the leading depending > on the line length, and the line length (together with type size) > depending on the margins... What set of parameters to specify the layout would you think is most convenient? Achim -- ________________________________________________________________________ | \_____/ | Achim Blumensath \O/ \___/\ | Mathematische Grundlagen der Informatik =o= \ /\ \| www-mgi.informatik.rwth-aachen.de/~blume /"\ o----| ____________________________________________________________________\___| 15-Jan-2001 19:25:34-GMT,3901;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA14544 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 12:25:32 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0FJKL708084; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:20:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA00611; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:18:25 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 481084 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:18:24 +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 UAA00603 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:18:23 +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 UAA18684 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:18:22 +0100 Received: from musse.tninet.se (musse.tninet.se [195.100.94.12]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f0FJIM707838 for ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:18:22 +0100 (MET) Received: (qmail 27777 invoked from network); 15 Jan 2001 20:18:21 +0100 Received: from garibaldi.tninet.se (HELO algonet.se) (195.100.94.103) by musse.tninet.se with SMTP; 15 Jan 2001 20:18:21 +0100 Received: from [195.100.226.143] (du173-226.ppp.su-anst.tninet.se [195.100.226.173]) by garibaldi.tninet.se (BLUETAIL Mail Robustifier 2.2.1) with ESMTP id 888165.586299.979garibaldi-s1 ; Mon, 15 Jan 2001 20:18:19 +0100 X-Sender: haberg@pop.matematik.su.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2001 11:20:28 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Hans Aberg Subject: Re: GELLMU progress To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200101061950.OAA03845@pluto.math.albany.edu> At 14:50 -0500 1-01-06, William F. Hammond wrote: >Although I've written in C, I've never gotten into C++. Are there >good regular expression libraries for C++? I once wrote a regular expression -> NFA translator. If one wants to translate into a DFA, one problem is that some regular words produces exponential size DFA's. One way around this is to translate DFA transitions dynamically, in which case both size and time can be made fast (space as NFA, time as DFA). I have never seen any such libraries, but they must exist, as there are programs like grep and the like, which uses regular expression and must use some kind of FA (finite automata) for string identification. In your case, I think you want to attach rules to the parsing, so parser generateors seem to be better. In addition, you probably have a limited amount of programmer time at your disposal. So this speaks for relying on existing parser generators. Once one knows what is needed, one can choose other alternatives as a means of optimization. If one does not want to use C/C++, there is a parser generator in Haskell http://haskell.org/, called "Happy" I think. And for Java, there is ANTLR http://www.antlr.org/. Hans Aberg 28-Jan-2001 22:44:06-GMT,5974;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA16983 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 15:44:04 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0SMeoY06964; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:43:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA25254; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:37:51 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484044 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:37:50 +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 XAA25246 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:37:48 +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 XAA33270 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:37:48 +0100 Received: from mail.umu.se (custer.umdac.umu.se [130.239.8.14]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0SMbnY06729 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:37:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from [130.239.137.13] (mariehemsv093.sn.umu.se [130.239.137.13]) by mail.umu.se (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id XAA03532 for ; Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:37:48 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id XAA25247 Message-ID: Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 23:37:23 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Subject: Templates To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L As I have (finally) some practical experience of using templates (kind of late, but the stuff I've been doing the last year haven't involved much design), I have encountered some general issues about templates that I think need some thought: 1. The order of parameter assignments. I haven't seen anything in the documentation about in which order the code for the various keys get executed, but in the implementation it looks as if they are executed in the order they are listed. It would be nice if this could be put in writing since you sometimes need one assignment to be carried out before another (my concrete example of this is that an instance key gets used in code for an `s' key). 2. The nature of the `n' key type Are `n' keys evaluated (expanded) at declaration-time or not? template.dtx is actually contradicting itself on this matter: in Section 1 it says `n' is the same thing as `f0', but in Subsection 3.1 there is an example using \DelayEvaluation in the default for a type `n' key to avoid declaration-time evaluation. As far as I can tell the implementation takes a third position as it parses a \MultiSelection but otherwise leaves the code unevaluated. My gut feeling is that the values for these keys should be evaluated at declaration, although so far I haven't been able to come up with any example where this is really needed. Anyway, if the declaration-time expansion is done as \edef\name@value{} then a \DelayEvaluation can be defined through \def\DelayEvaluation#1{% \iffalse{\fi}% \toks@=\expandafter{\name@value #1}% \edef\name@value{\iffalse}\fi \the\toks@ } and \MultiSelection can be defined using a similar trick. Since names are things that are to end up between a \csname and the matching \endcsname it should be safe to use an unprotected \edef here. Of course there would have to be some formal specification of what you can put in an `n' type value in this case, but some discussions in the past (such as that about declaring an \"A instance for xinitials [1]) suggest to me that such a specification is needed for other reasons as well and has been for some time. A comparison with fontinst might also be useful here. Although I don't think it is spelt out like this anywhere, fontinst makes a distinction between string variables (the values of which are fully evaluated/expanded when they are assigned) and command variables (where no expansion takes place until they are used). Thus what I'm suggesting is that `n' type keys should work like string variables, whereas `f' type keys should work like command variables. But I think that is all I've come up with, for the moment. Lars Hellström [1] About xinitials: The problem with that is of course not in the template, but in the document command which passes general text to an argument which expects a name value. The right thing to do would be to mangle the argument into a working name before trying to use it as an instance name. (A sketch for a mangling procedure would be the following: Require that the text to mangle is robust and doesn't contain any TeX primitives. Define representations for the text commands. Throw away all commands which aren't text commands---making \protect temporarily \@gobble should take care of that. Besides that something needs to be done about the \chardef tokens \% and \&; making them proper text commands is probably the way to go.) 29-Jan-2001 8:09:50-GMT,7729;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA27393 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 01:09:48 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0T89BY01239; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:09:11 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA27194; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:06:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 483810 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:05:59 +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 JAA27187 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:05:57 +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 JAA12928 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:05:57 +0100 Received: from moutvdom00.kundenserver.de (moutvdom00.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.149]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0T85uY00574 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:05:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.208] (helo=mrvdom01.schlund.de) by moutvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14N9K0-0001rP-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:05:56 +0100 Received: from manz-3e364872.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.72.114] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom01.schlund.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14N9Jw-0002kg-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:05:52 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id JAA21826; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:03:18 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14965.9157.631021.803002@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 09:03:17 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: Templates To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Lars, > 1. The order of parameter assignments. > > I haven't seen anything in the documentation about in which order the code > for the various keys get executed, but in the implementation it looks as if > they are executed in the order they are listed. i guess this is something for David to comment on, my memory is a bit hazy the very first drafts of the template interface (where there was still something like DeclareCommandInstance and other stuff) we tried to be able to use key values inside an instance for specifying the values of other keys, eg baselineskip = 12pt, topskip = 10pt, textheight = \baselineskip * 49 + \topskip, but first of all we never came up with a good way to reference keys on the right hand side and then there was the problem this concept only worked for certain key types and (forgotten what) and ... so basically that idea was abandomed again, though there might be some traces left in the code I fear. As it looks right now it seems to like this: - default values are executed first order of specification at template level (unless overwritten) - instance values executed thereafter and in order of specification at instance level this is from looking at the following example: \RequirePackage{template} \RequirePackage{trace} \DeclareTemplateType{xxx}{0} \def\MultiSelection{\MultiSelectionError} %\def\foo{bar} %\traceon \DeclareTemplate{xxx}{test}{0} { xkey=n [\foo] \xkey, ykey=n [\Delayevaluation\foo] \ykey, zkey=n \zkey, last=n [last] \lastkey } { \DoParameterAssignments abc } \ShowTemplate{xxx}{test} \DeclareInstance{xxx}{bar}{test} { zkey = foo, xkey = baz } \DeclareInstance{xxx}{baz}{test} { last = first, zkey = foo } \ShowInstance{xxx}{bar} \ShowInstance{xxx}{baz} ---------------------------------------------- which gives: (./template-test.tex LaTeX2e <2000/06/01> Babel and hyphenation patterns for english, french, german, ngerman, du mylang, nohyphenation, loaded. (./template.sty (./ldcsetup.sty (/cdrom/texmf/tex/latex/graphics/keyval.sty) (/usr/local/texmf/tex/latex/tools/calc.sty))) (./trace.sty) ******* Template: xxx/test ******* * * Defaults: * \TPD>/xxx/test=macro:->\KV@xxx/test@last {\def \lastkey {last}}\KV@xxx/test@yk ey {\def \ykey {\Delayevaluation \foo }}\KV@xxx/test@xkey {\def \xkey {\foo } } * * Restrictions: * \TPR>/xxx/test=\relax * * Body: * > \TP>/xxx/test=\long macro: -> \DoParameterAssignments abc . \TP>/xxx/test l.22 \ShowTemplate{xxx}{test} ? ******* Instance: <>xxx/bar ******* * > \<>xxx/bar=macro: ->\TP@assignments {\def \ykey {\Delayevaluation \foo }\def \lastkey {last}\de f \zkey {foo}\def \xkey {baz}}\TP>/xxx/test . \<>xxx/bar l.36 \ShowInstance{xxx}{bar} ? ******* Instance: <>xxx/baz ******* * > \<>xxx/baz=macro: ->\TP@assignments {\def \xkey {\foo }\def \ykey {\Delayevaluation \foo }\def \lastkey {first}\def \zkey {foo}}\TP>/xxx/test . \<>xxx/baz l.37 \ShowInstance{xxx}{baz} ? x ------------------------------------------------------------- > It would be nice if this > could be put in writing since you sometimes need one assignment to be > carried out before another (my concrete example of this is that an instance > key gets used in code for an `s' key). perhaps the above semantics could be made a formal specification though it would need to be checked whether this is true for all key types. As I said my recollection is that in the end the feeling was that we can't rely on order of specification (though even that would need formal specification) > 2. The nature of the `n' key type > > Are `n' keys evaluated (expanded) at declaration-time or not? template.dtx > is actually contradicting itself on this matter: in Section 1 it says `n' > is the same thing as `f0', but in Subsection 3.1 there is an example using > \DelayEvaluation in the default for a type `n' key to avoid > declaration-time evaluation. As far as I can tell the implementation takes > a third position as it parses a \MultiSelection but otherwise leaves the > code unevaluated. section 3.1 is rubbish and perhaps due to a bug that i just noticed trying the code. the code indeed looks for \MultiSelection but since MultiSelection is an undefined csname the test via \expandafter\ifx\@car dies a horrible death if you do key =n [\foo] \key and \foo is undefined (since that is then = to \MultiSelection) this is why the above sample code eactually \def's \MultiSelection have to run to earn some bread and butter (more on that tonight) frank 29-Jan-2001 11:48:14-GMT,3766;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id EAA01160 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 04:48:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TBlKY08675; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:47:20 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id MAA01634; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:46:58 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484312 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:46:57 +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 MAA01627 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:46:56 +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 MAA15846 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:46:55 +0100 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 f0TBkqY08596 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:46:52 +0100 (MET) 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 MAA04301; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:45:14 +0100 (CET) X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id MAA01628 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 12:46:56 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Subject: Re: Templates To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14965.9157.631021.803002@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> At 09.03 +0100 2001-01-29, Frank Mittelbach wrote: >Lars, [snip] > > It would be nice if this > > could be put in writing since you sometimes need one assignment to be > > carried out before another (my concrete example of this is that an instance > > key gets used in code for an `s' key). > >perhaps the above semantics could be made a formal specification though it >would need to be checked whether this is true for all key types. As I said my >recollection is that in the end the feeling was that we can't rely on order >of specification (though even that would need formal specification) OK, you cannot in general assume that the container for one key value is assigned before the container for another (this wasn't what I thought but it is probably logical if you think about what \DeclareInstance does). This fact is probably important enough to be stressed in the documentation (kind of "Note to people who write their own templates: You cannot make any assuptions about the order of assignments carried out by \DoParameterAssignments."). Lars Hellström 29-Jan-2001 18:00:31-GMT,5616;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA10764 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 11:00:28 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TI0AY26437; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 19:00:10 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA10940; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:58:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484884 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:58:29 +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 SAA10933 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:58:28 +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 SAA43118 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:58:29 +0100 Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0THwSY25531 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:58:28 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.219] (helo=mrvdom03.kundenserver.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NIZL-0003YN-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:58:23 +0100 Received: from manz-3e36458c.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.69.140] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom03.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NIZI-00059C-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:58:20 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id SAA23493; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:55:43 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14965.44703.515305.92520@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:55:43 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: Templates To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: > My gut feeling is that the values for these keys should be evaluated at > declaration, although so far I haven't been able to come up with any > example where this is really needed. Anyway, if the declaration-time > expansion is done as > > \edef\name@value{} i have my doubts that there should be any unprotected edefs anywhere if you can't really control the contents. but the there is perhaps an argument for general declaration time evaluation. then perhaps there isn't, it would really help to get some arguments (in terms of examples) why this is helpful. right now we have - no evaluation for functions, names (with the exception that \MultiSelection is evaluated but this can be viewed as part of the snytax spec rather than an evaluation) - evaluation for lengths and counters which is sort of reasonable i think, or not? > A comparison with fontinst might also be useful here. Although I don't > think it is spelt out like this anywhere, fontinst makes a distinction > between string variables (the values of which are fully evaluated/expanded > when they are assigned) and command variables (where no expansion takes > place until they are used). Thus what I'm suggesting is that `n' type keys > should work like string variables, whereas `f' type keys should work > like command variables. that would be an alternative, but again I would like to see at least a single example why one would need/want expansion (beside gut feeling, though the latter might be useful) > [1] About xinitials: The problem with that is of course not in the > template, but in the document command which passes general text to an > argument which expects a name value. The right thing to do would be to > mangle the argument into a working name before trying to use it as an > instance name. (A sketch for a mangling procedure would be the following: > Require that the text to mangle is robust and doesn't contain any TeX > primitives. Define representations for the text commands. Throw away all > commands which aren't text commands---making \protect temporarily \@gobble > should take care of that. Besides that something needs to be done about the > \chardef tokens \% and \&; making them proper text commands is probably the > way to go.) right on all accounts. a general function for doing this, eg taking some tex/text input and making a csname acceptable "name" out of it would be helpful on many occasions. frank 29-Jan-2001 20:01:54-GMT,4607;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA14789 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:01:53 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TK1YY26599; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:01:34 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA12407; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:00:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484920 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:59:59 +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 UAA12397 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:59:57 +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 UAA23000 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:59:57 +0100 Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TJxvY25801 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:59:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.209] (helo=mrvdom02.schlund.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NKSt-0006QR-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:59:51 +0100 Received: from manz-3e364861.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.72.97] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom02.schlund.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NKTC-0007sh-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:00:10 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id UAA23849; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:51:29 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14965.51648.871917.414946@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:51:28 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: Templates To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=81=F6m?= writes: > OK, you cannot in general assume that the container for one key value is > assigned before the container for another (this wasn't what I thought but > it is probably logical if you think about what \DeclareInstance does). This > fact is probably important enough to be stressed in the documentation (kind > of "Note to people who write their own templates: You cannot make any > assuptions about the order of assignments carried out by > \DoParameterAssignments."). oh yes (if it is indeed that way), but it would be worth checking if there is a clear relation of a describable nature and if so that could be described alternatively. problem really is like this k1 =n \key, l1 =l \key2 then you can't do k1 =12pt l1 = \key + 10pt in an instance declaration since the \key would not be defined until the instance is used why l1 is evaluted when the instance is created at least i think this is how it behaves currently, maybe that's bad and one should \def or \edef all keys at declaration time. (ignore for the moment that one shouldn't use \key in the instance since this is internal to the template body so to speak; one could imagine something like \keyval{k1} instead if one would go for this kind of feature --- one problem with \keyval or the whole thing in generls is for which types should it be allowed and with what semantics? ) frank 29-Jan-2001 20:03:08-GMT,3927;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA14864 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:03:06 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TK31Y27314; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:03:01 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA12444; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:01:34 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484926 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:01:33 +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 UAA12405 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:00:00 +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 UAA31988 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:59:59 +0100 Received: from moutvdom00.kundenserver.de (moutvdom00.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.149]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TJxxY25823 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:59:59 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.209] (helo=mrvdom02.schlund.de) by moutvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NKT1-0003R5-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:59:59 +0100 Received: from manz-3e364861.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.72.97] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom02.schlund.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NKTB-0007sh-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:00:09 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id UAA23856; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:56:49 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14965.51969.510549.703034@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 20:56:49 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: Templates (collection instances) To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: > As I have (finally) some practical experience of using templates (kind of > late, but the stuff I've been doing the last year haven't involved much > design), I have encountered some general issues about templates that I have you had any usages for CollectionInstances while getting some practical experience? the more we do use the stuff (template/instancess i mean) the more it seems to us that collections aren't quite the way they should be (though we don't know what or how they should be). i mean any time we start thinking of using them for something we don't in the end consider "that" case a good case and finally don't use them because of ... in other words they aren't quite right and perhaps in that form of no use at all, ever. any ideas? frank 29-Jan-2001 21:48:42-GMT,3729;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA18352 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 14:48:41 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TLmaY26525; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:48:36 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA13715; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:46:51 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484963 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:46:50 +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 WAA13708 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:46:49 +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 WAA12860 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:46:49 +0100 Received: from oxmail.ox.ac.uk (oxmail1.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.1]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TLknY26160 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 22:46:49 +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 #3) id 14NM8O-0001tX-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:46:48 +0000 Received: from max55.public.ox.ac.uk ([192.76.27.55] helo=spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk ident=rahtz) by frontend2.herald.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #1) id 14NM8O-0002IG-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:46:49 +0000 X-Mailer: emacs 20.6.1 (via feedmail 8 Q); VM 6.86 under Emacs 20.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Message-ID: <14965.58948.408001.938171@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:53:08 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Sebastian Rahtz Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Frank Mittelbach writes: > i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the default font > encoding from OT1 to T1 so that more people get proper hyphenation > without the need to say > > \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} > > in their documents and would be interested to hear what the opinion on this > list would be (not that i consider this list a representative sample of the > average LaTeX user). I vote against, strongly. If you make a major change like this to standard LaTeX, but do not offer major *new* facilities, you will simply alienate 2000000 people around the world... that is to say, all those people whose documents stop working cos they don't have T1 CMR fonts. No, they don't have EC fonts, and don't want them 'cos they are not Type1 :-} from the grave, Sebastian 29-Jan-2001 22:35:50-GMT,5006;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA19700 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:35:48 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TMZiY10838; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:35:44 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA14447; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:34:16 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484973 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:34:15 +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 XAA14438 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:34:14 +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 XAA41030 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:34:14 +0100 Received: from csc.albany.edu (sarah.albany.edu [169.226.1.103]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TMYEY10667 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:34:14 +0100 (MET) Received: from pluto.math.albany.edu (pluto.math.albany.edu [169.226.23.44]) by csc.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA14198 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:34:01 -0500 (EST) Received: (from hammond@localhost) by pluto.math.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA14964 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:34:00 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:34:00 -0500 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: "William F. Hammond" Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Frank -- I don't know if you are aware of some private correspondence that I've had with others. But most who read this list were certainly not part of it. I think that switching the default font encoding to T1 is probably a good thing to do. I hope then that by default there are supported names like \textgreater \textasciitilde, etc. for all 33 non-alphanumeric printable ascii characters including 0x20 that work properly in various LaTeX contexts. My point of view is that of one writing a formatter from an XML document type to LaTeX source. Of course, David's Carlisle's xmltex, which I like as far as I've gone with it, can be used for this, but it's not the path I began in the summer of 1998, and I still see reason for formatting to LaTeX source in a system with modular design since then users (but not this user who just won't do that) have emergency recourse. In the general context of formatting from XML to LaTeX source, though not so much in my specific context, nor in the context of authors coming from a LaTeX or TeX background, I am concerned about what happens with 8 bit characters in the range 0xA0 - 0xFF from the various ISO 8 bit character sets. When such characters appear outside of markup in XML they have the same status as printable alphanumeric ascii characters. Presently one needs to fight the design of XML systems to accommodate them in formatting to LaTeX source for use with a default LaTeX installation. By default with T1, I believe, the input encoding for these characters matches the "cork" encoding. But when inputenc is set to something with a standard public name -- for example an 8 bit name that would be recognized by one of James Clark's XML parsers "xp" or "SP" I think it highly desirable that the typeset appearance of the characters match what *should* be the screen appearance in a web browser when the character set is properly specified. In particular under such an encoding absent an explicit author indication for math there should be no math. For example, the miniature "1/2" at data point 0xBD in ISO-8859-1 (Latin 1) should *not* be regarded as math unless an author should choose for some reason I do not anticipate to place it inside math. (Probably, however, the present inputenc name "latin1" needs to remain as it is for backward compatibility.) I believe that David's xmltex accommodates all 16 bit characters under unicode, but it cannot be used in formatting to LaTeX source. -- Bill 29-Jan-2001 22:55:12-GMT,2780;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA20219 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:55:10 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TMt5Y13982; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:55:05 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA14535; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:53:36 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484979 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:53:35 +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 XAA14528 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:53:33 +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 XAA29868 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:53:34 +0100 Received: from ascend-tk-p220.dialin.uni-bonn.de (ascend-tk-p220.dialin.uni-bonn.de [131.220.244.220]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TMrSY13782 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:53:28 +0100 (MET) Received: (from root@localhost) by ascend-tk-p220.dialin.uni-bonn.de (8.11.2/8.11.1) id f0TNAQK10678; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:10:26 +0100 References: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: <200101292310.f0TNAQK10678@ascend-tk-p220.dialin.uni-bonn.de> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:10:26 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Ernst Molitor 942 Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> (message from Frank Mittelbach on Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:22:55 +0100) Dear Frank Mittelbach, your suggestion to change the default font encoding from OT1 to T1 sounds good; I'd very much appreciate such a change. Best regards, Ernst Molitor 29-Jan-2001 23:02:08-GMT,3565;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA20409 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:02:06 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TN1pY16665; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:01:51 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA14614; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:00:22 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484870 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:00:21 +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 XAA14552 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:57:39 +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 XAA35600 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:57:40 +0100 Received: from post2.inre.asu.edu (post2.inre.asu.edu [129.219.110.73]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TMvdY14322 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 23:57:40 +0100 (MET) Received: from conversion.post2.inre.asu.edu by asu.edu (PMDF V6.0-24 #47347) id <0G7Y009015274F@asu.edu> for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:56:31 -0700 (MST) Received: from smtp.asu.edu (smtp.asu.edu [129.219.13.92]) by asu.edu (PMDF V6.0-24 #47347) with ESMTP id <0G7Y007HV527Y1@asu.edu> for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:56:31 -0700 (MST) Received: from mercury (lanload1.eas.asu.edu [149.169.25.2]) by smtp.asu.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id PAA11170 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:56:32 -0700 (MST) MIME-version: 1.0 X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2919.6700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2910.0) Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit Importance: Normal X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-priority: Normal Message-ID: Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 15:56:58 -0700 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Li Bing Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200101292310.f0TNAQK10678@ascend-tk-p220.dialin.uni-bonn.de> Dear All, Please tell me how to unsubscribe? Thanks! Thanks, Bing -----Original Message----- From: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project [mailto:LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE]On Behalf Of Ernst Molitor 942 Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 4:10 PM To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: default font encoding Dear Frank Mittelbach, your suggestion to change the default font encoding from OT1 to T1 sounds good; I'd very much appreciate such a change. Best regards, Ernst Molitor 29-Jan-2001 23:19:21-GMT,2884;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA20874 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:19:20 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TNJGY26493; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:19:16 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA14784; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:17:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484874 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:17:46 +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 AAA14777 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:17:45 +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 AAA12552 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:17:46 +0100 Received: from plmsc.psu.edu (raman.plmsc.psu.edu [128.118.156.124]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TNHjY25632 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:17:46 +0100 (MET) Received: (from boris@localhost) by plmsc.psu.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA17255; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:07:37 -0500 Message-ID: <200101292307.SAA17255@plmsc.psu.edu> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:07:37 -0500 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Boris Veytsman Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> (message from Frank Mittelbach on Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:22:55 +0100) > Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:22:55 +0100 > From: Frank Mittelbach > > > i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the default font encoding > from OT1 to T1 so that more people get proper hyphenation without the need to > say > > \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} > I'd suggest to postpone this until free EC postscript fonts are available. Many people use LaTeX for pdf output rather than as a pretext to kill some trees, you know. -- Good luck -Boris http://www.plmsc.psu.edu/~boris/ 29-Jan-2001 20:38:17-GMT,3552;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA16063 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 13:38:16 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TKcAY08018; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:38:10 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA12867; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:41 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484947 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:40 +0100 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA12860 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:39 +0100 (MET) Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TKadY07738 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:39 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.219] (helo=mrvdom03.kundenserver.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NL2P-0000pd-00 for LATEX-L@relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:33 +0100 Received: from manz-3e3645ad.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.69.173] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom03.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NL2P-0004eU-00 for LATEX-L@relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:33 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id VAA23994; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:22:56 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:22:55 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L we have publically announced often enough that the core of 2e is essentially frozen except for serious bug fixes and new development should happen at package level --- all this because of compatibility making sure that documents do work identically (as far as possible) from one maintenence release to the next, and i still think this is the right decision. i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the default font encoding from OT1 to T1 so that more people get proper hyphenation without the need to say \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} in their documents and would be interested to hear what the opinion on this list would be (not that i consider this list a representative sample of the average LaTeX user). opinions? frank 30-Jan-2001 0:56:41-GMT,3110;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA23368 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 17:56:40 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0U0uZY06010; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 01:56:35 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id BAA15264; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 01:55:06 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484914 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 01:55:05 +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 BAA15257 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 01:55:04 +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 BAA16038 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 01:55:04 +0100 Received: from trmail.triumf.ca (trmail.Triumf.CA [142.90.100.150]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0U0t3Y05925 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 01:55:03 +0100 (MET) Received: from erich.triumf.ca (erich.Triumf.CA [142.90.100.1]) by trmail.triumf.ca (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id f0U0t2L04623 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:55:02 -0800 Received: by erich.triumf.ca for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:55:02 -0800 Message-ID: <010129165502.2020b065@erich.triumf.ca> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 16:55:02 -0800 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Donald Arseneau Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L >wonder if we should change the default font encoding from OT1 to T1 NO. Only at the next major upheaval of LaTeX. And only with freely available type-1 (Compter modernish) fonts with the T1 character set. This change would create much more disruption than several minor changes that have been rejected in the past, including a disruption of installations, as opposed to just improved formatting. Even for the cases where the change works as intended -- better hyphenation -- it will change the formatting of documents. I personally prefer the best formatting at any stage, but you have been holding the line strenuously against such changes. Donald Arseneau asnd@triumf.ca 30-Jan-2001 7:51:30-GMT,3193;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA01846 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 00:51:29 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0U7p3Y18919; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:51:03 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA16446; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:49:02 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485024 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:49:01 +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 IAA16439 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:48:59 +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 IAA16080 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:49:01 +0100 Received: from lumiere.idris.fr (lumiere.idris.fr [130.84.8.14]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0U7n0Y18652 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:49:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from mira.idris.fr (gaulle@mira.idris.fr [130.84.12.100]) by lumiere.idris.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA13762 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:48:59 +0100 (CET) Received: (from gaulle@localhost) by mira.idris.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA40360; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:48:58 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <14966.29161.439035.699993@mira.idris.fr> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 08:48:57 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: "Bernard GAULLE (CNRS/IDRIS - France) " Subject: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L >i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the default font encoding >from OT1 to T1 Against! The pb is not that one. I mean that people don't wish not to type in the font encoding they want (eg someone else said to them... because that font encoding has absolutely no meaning for them) but wish to be able to type in the fonts they want to use (and hope LaTeX would be able to know the font encoding to apply). Chosing default T1 is a switch to a default font set which is unappropriate (unuseful, less beautiful, non TeX default, non free Postscript or True Type, ...) for a great part of the world. --bg 30-Jan-2001 8:14:26-GMT,4364;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA02343 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 01:14:25 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0U8ELY27572; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:14:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA16763; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:12:53 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485062 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:12:52 +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 JAA16755 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:12:51 +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 JAA34540 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:12:51 +0100 Received: from moutvdom00.kundenserver.de (moutvdom00.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.149]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0U8CoY27294 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:12:50 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.208] (helo=mrvdom01.schlund.de) by moutvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NVuD-0002ha-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:12:49 +0100 Received: from pd9502cde.dip0.t-ipconnect.de ([217.80.44.222] helo=servus) by mrvdom01.schlund.de with smtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NVu0-0000wZ-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:12:37 +0100 References: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 Message-ID: <003401c08a94$512bed00$78e2fea9@servus> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:11:57 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Ulrich Dirr Organization: Art & Satz Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L I've never used T1 encoding. No Computer Modern at all, or type-1 versions (the typewriter font is still the best ;-)). So when you froze T1 encoded fonts into the core that means that after building the format file I need these T1 fonts. But I'm not aware of free type-1 fonts for T1 encoding. Ulrich Dirr -- Art & Satz Ulrich Dirr Arnimstraße 9 81369 München Germany/Deutschland -- fon (+49 89) 743 30 60 fax (+49 89) 743 30 61 email ud@art-satz.de -- -=*:-) ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank Mittelbach" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 9:22 PM Subject: default font encoding > we have publically announced often enough that the core of 2e is essentially > frozen except for serious bug fixes and new development should happen at > package level --- all this because of compatibility making sure that documents > do work identically (as far as possible) from one maintenence release to the > next, and i still think this is the right decision. > > i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the default font encoding > from OT1 to T1 so that more people get proper hyphenation without the need to > say > > \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} > > in their documents and would be interested to hear what the opinion on this > list would be (not that i consider this list a representative sample of the > average LaTeX user). > > opinions? > > frank 30-Jan-2001 8:17:25-GMT,3710;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA02376 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 01:17:24 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0U8HKY28166; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:17:20 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA16840; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:15:53 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485072 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:15:52 +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 JAA16833 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:15:51 +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 JAA39048 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:15:50 +0100 Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0U8FoY27852 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:15:50 +0100 (MET) Received: from clipper.ens.fr (clipper-gw.ens.fr [129.199.1.22]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f0U8Fn594231 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:15:49 +0100 (CET) Received: from (ebrunet@localhost) by clipper.ens.fr (8.9.2/jb-1.1) References: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <003401c08a94$512bed00$78e2fea9@servus> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i Message-ID: <20010130091549.A21414@clipper.ens.fr> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 09:15:49 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Eric Brunet Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <003401c08a94$512bed00$78e2fea9@servus>; from ud@art-satz.de on Tue, Jan 30, 2001 at 09:11:57AM +0100 On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:22:55PM +0100, Frank Mittelbach wrote: > i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the default font > encoding > from OT1 to T1 so that more people get proper hyphenation without the > need to > say > > \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} > > in their documents and would be interested to hear what the opinion on > this > list would be (not that i consider this list a representative sample of > the > average LaTeX user). Maybe another way to do it is to put it in babel. English writers don't really need T1 fonts, and don't need a change in latex2e right now. But any language in babel could have a default inputenc and fontenc, such that setting \usepackage[francais]{babel} or (german, or any west europe language) would automatically set the T1 fontenc and the latin1 inputenc. Setting \usepackage[russian]{babel} would select a different and suitable (inputenc,fontenc) tupple. -- Éric Brunet 30-Jan-2001 10:34:36-GMT,5605;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA04870 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 03:34:34 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UAYLY13602; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:34:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA19232; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:32:45 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485289 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:32:45 +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 LAA19225 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:32:43 +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 LAA38030 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:32:44 +0100 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 f0UAWiY13206 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:32:44 +0100 (MET) 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 LAA17402; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:31:05 +0100 (CET) X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id LAA19226 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:32:38 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Subject: Re: Templates (collection instances) To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14965.51969.510549.703034@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> At 18.55 +0100 2001-01-29, Frank Mittelbach wrote: > > My gut feeling is that the values for these keys should be evaluated at > > declaration, although so far I haven't been able to come up with any > > example where this is really needed. Anyway, if the declaration-time > > expansion is done as > > > > \edef\name@value{} > >i have my doubts that there should be any unprotected edefs anywhere if you >can't really control the contents. Perhaps a straightforward unprotected \edef isn't right, but a \protected@edef would let through a lot of things which are bad too. Perhaps the right thing would be some kind of \protect@is@error@edef. > > A comparison with fontinst might also be useful here. Although I don't > > think it is spelt out like this anywhere, fontinst makes a distinction > > between string variables (the values of which are fully evaluated/expanded > > when they are assigned) and command variables (where no expansion takes > > place until they are used). Thus what I'm suggesting is that `n' type keys > > should work like string variables, whereas `f' type keys should work > > like command variables. > >that would be an alternative, but again I would like to see at least a single >example why one would need/want expansion (beside gut feeling, though the >latter might be useful) First example: The name value is a mangled general text; then you don't want to mangle it anew each time you use it (especially since you don't know the conditions then will be), but have it stored in a mangled form. Second example: I suspect that there will be a number of instances declared where at least some of the key values get set to the current value of some LaTeX parameter (one could argue that this is bad programming, but this kind of thing is sometimes hard to avoid). Currently this is straightforward for count and length keys, but not at all easy for name, boolean, and instance keys, where I think this should work as well. For function key values however the datatype is too unstructured to allow anything of this sort due to technical difficulties. At 20.56 +0100 2001-01-29, Frank Mittelbach wrote: > > As I have (finally) some practical experience of using templates (kind of > > late, but the stuff I've been doing the last year haven't involved much > > design), I have encountered some general issues about templates that I > >have you had any usages for CollectionInstances while getting some practical >experience? Not yet, but I have an idea about where to use them. Last night I wrote an environment `thedocindex' which essentially uses the `std' instance of template type `docindex'. Some documents which use this environment (for technical reasons the name is hard-wired into a .ist file) will however want another instance here, and then one can achieve this using a collection instance. Or so I think. Lars Hellström 30-Jan-2001 10:48:00-GMT,4017;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA05098 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 03:47:58 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UAljY16601; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:47:45 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA19430; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:46:17 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485307 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:46:16 +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 LAA19423 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:46:14 +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 LAA15196 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:46:15 +0100 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 f0UAkFY16242 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:46:15 +0100 (MET) 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 LAA17528; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:44:35 +0100 (CET) X-Sender: lars@abel.math.umu.se Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de id LAA19424 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:46:12 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Lars =?iso-8859-1?Q?Hellstr=F6m?= Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> At 23.34 +0100 2001-01-29, William F. Hammond wrote: >Frank -- > >I don't know if you are aware of some private correspondence that I've >had with others. But most who read this list were certainly not part >of it. > >I think that switching the default font encoding to T1 is probably a >good thing to do. > >I hope then that by default there are supported names like >\textgreater \textasciitilde, etc. for all 33 non-alphanumeric >printable ascii characters including 0x20 that work properly in >various LaTeX contexts. But those are already working regardless of whether you use T1 or OT1, the difference is only that when you use OT1 the \textgreater is taken from OML. Most likely there are characters in latin1 which are provided by TS1 rather than T1, so there's no fundamental difference. >In the general context of formatting from XML to LaTeX source, though >not so much in my specific context, nor in the context of authors coming >from a LaTeX or TeX background, I am concerned about what happens with >8 bit characters in the range 0xA0 - 0xFF from the various ISO 8 bit >character sets. Those should be converted to "LaTeX internal representation" (i.e. \textgreater and friends) by your XML-to-LaTeX converter. The inputenc package only exists for the convenience of humans, not automatic converters, which should instead produce documents that use visible 7-bit ASCII throughout. Lars Hellström 30-Jan-2001 18:04:09-GMT,3162;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA15500 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 11:04:07 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UHrup14533; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:53:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id SAA29810; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:44:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485954 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:44:31 +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 SAA29801 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:44:30 +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 SAA55900 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:44:30 +0100 Received: from zambeze.ujf-grenoble.fr (zambeze.ujf-grenoble.fr [152.77.2.3]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UHiTp12672 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:44:29 +0100 (MET) Received: from mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr (mozart.ujf-grenoble.fr [193.54.241.5]) by zambeze.ujf-grenoble.fr (Pro-8.9.3/8.9.3/Configured by AD & JE 25/10/1999) with ESMTP id SAA26067 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:44:29 +0100 (MET) Received: (from bouche@localhost) by mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr (8.9.3/8.8.5) id SAA16417; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:44:28 +0100 (MET) References: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> X-Mailer: VM 6.22 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Message-ID: <200101301744.SAA16417@mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:44:28 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Thierry Bouche Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Imho, either we can get rid of all O** encodings, including maths, or it's only a not very usefull way to overload ctt with cries. And the t1 (type 1) issue is quite relevant, here. I have been using default T1 formats for years, and switched back to OT1 by default because users didn't understand why their source files were not properly treated elsewhere... Th. 30-Jan-2001 20:32:12-GMT,3530;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA20770 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:32:10 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UKVvp21711; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:31:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA04992; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:20 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 486056 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:19 +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 VAA04985 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:18 +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 VAA36490 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:18 +0100 Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UKUIp21450 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:18 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.208] (helo=mrvdom01.schlund.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NhPo-0007nL-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:12 +0100 Received: from dialin351.zdv.uni-mainz.de ([134.93.175.51] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom01.schlund.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NhPr-0001Hg-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:16 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id UAA12716; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:59:58 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <14965.58948.408001.938171@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14967.7486.689372.23588@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:59:58 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14965.58948.408001.938171@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> > from the grave, Sebastian okay okay, good try to wake the ... from the grave. i agree that the missing T1 type1 fonts are a killer --- tend to forget that every now and then. so in other words, to get to a good internal handling i have to find proper free Type 1 fonts first and make them part of LaTeX. frank 30-Jan-2001 20:37:59-GMT,6994;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA20964 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 13:37:57 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UKXNp21895; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:33:23 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id VAA05085; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:31:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 486061 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:31:55 +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 VAA04998 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:24 +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 VAA16562 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:23 +0100 Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UKUNp21466 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:23 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.208] (helo=mrvdom01.schlund.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NhPu-0007nh-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:18 +0100 Received: from dialin351.zdv.uni-mainz.de ([134.93.175.51] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom01.schlund.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NhPt-0001Hg-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:30:18 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id VAA12807; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:22:22 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14967.8829.903878.620595@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:22:21 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> Bill, > I hope then that by default there are supported names like > \textgreater \textasciitilde, etc. for all 33 non-alphanumeric > printable ascii characters including 0x20 that work properly in > various LaTeX contexts. Lars already answered that: even with OT1 all those chars are already there (most of them at least), the main reason for a switch from OT1 to something else is not extra chars but hyphenate-able typesetting with languages other than English (for those who don't use MLTeX) > My point of view is that of one writing a formatter from an XML > document type to LaTeX source. Of course, David's Carlisle's xmltex, you should perhaps not translate that to an 8bit input code page but to the latex internal character representation which is 7bit you might want to have a look at the old talk of 1995 i gave in Brno about the relationship between input/internal/output encodings in latex and what role inputenc and fontenc plays therein, you find it at www.latex-project.org in the papers section. > In the general context of formatting from XML to LaTeX source, though > not so much in my specific context, nor in the context of authors coming > from a LaTeX or TeX background, I am concerned about what happens with > 8 bit characters in the range 0xA0 - 0xFF from the various ISO 8 bit > character sets. well if you translate XML to latex you have control about that range and you can map it to LaTeX's internal form depending on the source input encoding of your XML file. alternatively you could late latex do the mapping if the XML source input encoding is one that is recognised by inputenc (or if not by providing an inputenc mapping for that codepage) > By default with T1, I believe, the input encoding for these characters > matches the "cork" encoding. But when inputenc is set to something T1 is a font encoding not an input encoding. there is no inputenc method in LaTeX that supports raw 8bit to be passed straight from input to output (well there is in the sense that if you use vanilla LaTeX without any inputenc -- but this is really only there for compatibility and not officially supported) > with a standard public name -- for example an 8 bit name that would be > recognized by one of James Clark's XML parsers "xp" or "SP" I think it > highly desirable that the typeset appearance of the characters match > what *should* be the screen appearance in a web browser when the > character set is properly specified. > > In particular under such an encoding absent an explicit author > indication for math there should be no math. For example, the > miniature "1/2" at data point 0xBD in ISO-8859-1 (Latin 1) should > *not* be regarded as math unless an author should choose for some > reason I do not anticipate to place it inside math. i agree and in some sense i'm quite happy that inputenc still says beta because i'm for year against having the inputenc files to map to anything other than text objects. in other words, i would want to have the 10 or so odd mappings in the various inputenc defs that do map to math be replaced by \DeclareInputText. i'm currently trying to document the internal representation of LaTeX including inputenc and the like and the current status is impossible to describe. > (Probably, however, the present inputenc name "latin1" needs to remain > as it is for backward compatibility.) well, probably, but then how many people would have known (and used the fact) that current inputenc latin1 actually has \DeclareInputText{189}{\textonehalf} % so that gives an error if placed in % math but \DeclareInputMath{185}{\mathonesuperior} would that also make an uproar on ctt? i.e., changing the inputencs to be text objects by default comments anybody? (Mr. from the grave?) cheers frank 30-Jan-2001 23:39:13-GMT,4201;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA27482 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:39:12 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UNcwp06414; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:38:58 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA09576; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:37:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484878 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:37:29 +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 AAA09569 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:37:28 +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 AAA48732 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:37:29 +0100 Received: from relay2.vsu.ru (mail.vsu.ru [62.76.169.17]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UNbPp06240 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:37:26 +0100 (MET) Received: by relay2.vsu.ru (Postfix, from userid 5) id 27F1F1A8F; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:37:22 +0300 (MSK) Received: (from vvv@localhost) by vvv.vsu.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA12371; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:33:08 +0300 X-Authentication-Warning: vvv.vsu.ru: vvv set sender to vvv@vvv.vsu.ru using -f References: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <14965.58948.408001.938171@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> <14967.7486.689372.23588@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Lines: 33 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:33:08 +0300 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Vladimir Volovich Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14967.7486.689372.23588@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> "FM" == Frank Mittelbach writes: FM> so in other words, to get to a good internal handling i have to FM> find proper free Type 1 fonts first and make them part of LaTeX. i made some experiments some time ago, and achieved quite satisfactory results in this direction: making type1 fonts from metafont fonts. the technology is based on auto-tracing high-resolution bitmaps -- such as 20000 dpi (from gf files produced by metafont), then optimizing and autohinting with fontlab. the resulting fonts look quite good (there are a few very small glitches which could be seen with very high magnification). they may need some hand work (which i will not be able to do due to the lack of time), but even without this i think that this could be better than nothing (at least :). i have some plans to produce type1 versions of "superfonts" which contain all glyphs from EC (T1), TC (TS1), LH (all cyrillic encodings), and cbgreek fonts, in all standard fontsizes (then all the EC,TC,LH,cbgreek fonts could be obtained by reencoding those type1 superfonts in pdftex or dvips). unfortunately, at the moment i'm busy with another projects. if there is some interest in this, however, i will put some test PFB file for one of the fonts, say, ecrm1000, so that you will be able to comment on the quality (may be, i'm overestimating it, and the whole approach is not satisfactory). so, if there is some interest, please tell me. :) Best regards, -- Vladimir. 30-Jan-2001 23:32:38-GMT,3340;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA27194 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:32:36 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UNWPp05785; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:32:25 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id AAA09471; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:30:54 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484870 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:30:53 +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 AAA09463 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:30:52 +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 AAA23396 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:30:53 +0100 Received: from oxmail.ox.ac.uk (oxmail2.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.1]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0UNUqp05636 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:30:52 +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 14NkEe-0004Wm-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:30:52 +0000 Received: from max77.public.ox.ac.uk ([192.76.27.77] helo=spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk ident=rahtz) by frontend2.herald.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 2.02 #1) id 14NkEe-0004gS-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:30:52 +0000 X-Mailer: emacs 20.6.1 (via feedmail 8 Q); VM 6.86 under Emacs 20.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> <14967.8829.903878.620595@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Message-ID: <14967.18934.759299.796243@spqr2.oucs.ox.ac.uk> Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2001 23:10:46 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Sebastian Rahtz Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14967.8829.903878.620595@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Frank Mittelbach writes: > would that also make an uproar on ctt? > i.e., changing the inputencs to be text > objects by default thats much less trouble. i expect subtle things would break but people would not immediately understand why and you might escape the blame > > comments anybody? (Mr. from the grave?) just call me mr schreck sebastian 31-Jan-2001 0:06:08-GMT,4633;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA28734 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 17:06:06 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V05Sp09994; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:05:28 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id BAA09921; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:03:59 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484901 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:03:58 +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 BAA09914 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:03:57 +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 BAA36792 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:03:57 +0100 Received: from waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de (waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.4.42]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V03up09817 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:03:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de (peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de [129.217.28.154]) by waldorf.cs.uni-dortmund.de with ESMTP id BAA11447 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:03:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de (tinne@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian 8.9.3-21) with ESMTP id BAA02073 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:03:55 +0100 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 (debian) References: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> <14967.8829.903878.620595@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> X-uri: http://ls2-www.cs.uni-dortmund.de/~tinnefeld/ X-face: *sXD#NpiH+[WIRUfGB;twtnVo=k{4Ev$$s75_Lf~Sw%(A74 `N'EtJI[Z{P'X@60ru7SfQ%.3It!Jw'?UjF ~_B1l-`S:F>h~!,!|ow*.'@nzW.ADJ06j/Mj5NVp3 X-Organization: Universitaet Dortmund, Lehrstuhl Informatik 2, D-44221 Dortmund X-Address: GB IV/323 CS, Baroper Strasse 301, D-44227 Dortmund X-Phone: +49 231 755-4737 oder -2777 (Sekretariat) X-Telefax: +49 231 755-2047 X-public-transport: H-Bahn, Busse 440, 449: Eichlinghofen H-Bahn Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <200101310003.BAA02073@peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:03:55 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Karsten Tinnefeld Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Message from Frank Mittelbach of "Tue, 30 Jan 2001 21:22:21 +0100." <14967.8829.903878.620595@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Frank, > how many people would have known (and used the fact) > that current inputenc latin1 actually has > > \DeclareInputText{189}{\textonehalf} % so that gives an error if placed in > % math > > but > > \DeclareInputMath{185}{\mathonesuperior} > would that also make an uproar on ctt? i.e., changing the inputencs to be text > objects by default I do not yet understand whether there are any strong objections to making them work in both modes, e.g., \ifmmode \frac 12 \else \textonehalf \fi or, resp., \ifmmode ^1 \else \textonesuperior \fi The strict division suggests that something is very wrong with this. What? -- Karsten Tinnefeld tinnefeld@ls2.cs.uni-dortmund.de Fachbereich Informatik, Lehrstuhl 2 T +49 231 755-4737 Universität Dortmund, D-44221 Dortmund, Deutschland F +49 231 755-2047 31-Jan-2001 2:33:08-GMT,3171;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA03614 for ; Tue, 30 Jan 2001 19:33:07 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V2Wdp21381; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:32:39 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id DAA10685; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:32:09 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484943 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:32:08 +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 DAA10678 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:32:07 +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 DAA34058 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:32:07 +0100 Received: from dsmtp19.dion.ne.jp (dsmtp19.dion.ne.jp [210.172.64.87]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V2W5p21335 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:32:06 +0100 (MET) Received: from yahoo.co.uk by dsmtp19.dion.ne.jp (8.9.3/3.7W-00081511) id LAA16841; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:31:57 +0900 (JST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win95; en-US; m18) Gecko/20001010 X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <3A7778BD.20509@yahoo.co.uk> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:30:21 +0900 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: James Kilfiger Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Frank Mittelbach wrote: > i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the default font encoding > from OT1 to T1 so that more people get proper hyphenation without the need to > say I vote NO (as if LaTeX were a democracy!) For reasons already expressed by Sebastian and Donald. Putting it in babel would also cause problems. People (rightly) don't expect the formatting of their documents to change from upgrade to upgrade, or from computer to computer. I can see less reason not to put T1 as the default for 2e* But I'd expect that font and encoding setting for 2e* to be much better handled (with templates) than is the case with 2e. James Kilfiger, on the other side of the earth 31-Jan-2001 7:39:31-GMT,4397;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id AAA10822 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 00:39:30 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V7d5p25468; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:39:05 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id IAA12369; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:37:33 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485102 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:37:32 +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 IAA12362 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:37:31 +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 IAA55806 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:37:32 +0100 Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V7bWp25199 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:37:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.220] (helo=mrvdom04.kundenserver.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NrpW-0003aQ-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:37:26 +0100 Received: from manz-3e364639.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.70.57] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom04.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NrpW-0003c9-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:37:27 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id HAA31876; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 07:49:51 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> <14967.8829.903878.620595@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <200101310003.BAA02073@peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14967.46479.253389.421142@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 07:49:51 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: inputenc -> text+math To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <200101310003.BAA02073@peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de> > I do not yet understand whether there are any strong objections to > making them work in both modes, e.g., > \ifmmode \frac 12 \else \textonehalf \fi or, resp., > \ifmmode ^1 \else \textonesuperior \fi > > The strict division suggests that something is very wrong with this. > What? for "symbols" like the above this can in fact be done this way and a few symbols hare "historically defined this way, ie \pounds -> \relax\ifmmode\mathsterling\else\textsterling but you need the \relax to ensure that the right thing happens at the beginning of tabular cells (timing problem in \halign) and this is the problem: you can't do that to "letters", the use of \relax there prohibits potential ligatures and not doing it means your definition produce wrong results or blow up in certain situations which is why i prefer a "simple" rule: - you can use in math only visible ascii directly (further restricted by what LaTeX uses for controls, eg \_^$...); anything else has to be done via csnames eg \times \pm \alpha ... - any 8bit is mapped to text only frank 31-Jan-2001 8:04:01-GMT,5115;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA11365 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:03:59 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V83gp01002; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:03:42 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA12801; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:03:33 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485120 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:03:32 +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 JAA12792 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:03:31 +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 JAA35780 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:03:30 +0100 Received: from moutvdom00.kundenserver.de (moutvdom00.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.149]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V83Sp00873 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:03:28 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.208] (helo=mrvdom01.schlund.de) by moutvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NsEh-0007Be-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:03:27 +0100 Received: from manz-3e36472c.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.71.44] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom01.schlund.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NsEe-0000tc-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:03:24 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id JAA32110; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:01:34 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14967.50782.287064.421256@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:01:34 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: Templates (collection instances) To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: > Perhaps a straightforward unprotected \edef isn't right, but a > \protected@edef would let through a lot of things which are bad too. > Perhaps the right thing would be some kind of \protect@is@error@edef. shouldn't that be, for the purpose you have in mind rather \protect@is@string@edef perhaps? i mean is the purpose is to make a "proper" latex internally usable name then stringing things is probably the way to go, or not? > >that would be an alternative, but again I would like to see at least a single > >example why one would need/want expansion (beside gut feeling, though the > >latter might be useful) > > First example: The name value is a mangled general text; then you don't > want to mangle it anew each time you use it (especially since you don't > know the conditions then will be), but have it stored in a mangled form. maybe, but could you be more specific in the example, please? i mean can you really see a practical need (not an abstract one) > Second example: I suspect that there will be a number of instances declared > where at least some of the key values get set to the current value of some > LaTeX parameter (one could argue that this is bad programming, but this > kind of thing is sometimes hard to avoid). is it really hard to avoid or is it only the way we are used to write classes (like using \baselineskip and later on changing it and not noticing that they are different). in some sense it means that you define sort of meta variables or rather "class constants" that you set near the top and then reuse. There is something to that as it (if done carefully) helps to structure your template instantiations and give them some sort of extra flexibility. on the other hand if one does that too much you get another hierachy into the layout process which is difficult to understand. but that doesn't really mean one shouldn't offer it. frank 31-Jan-2001 9:21:35-GMT,3216;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA12965 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:21:29 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V9Kvp26188; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:20:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA14315; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:20:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485192 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:20:49 +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 KAA14308 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:20:47 +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 KAA30798 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:20:47 +0100 Received: from wisbech.cl.cam.ac.uk (mta1.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.0.15]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V9Klp26140 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:20:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from pallas.cl.cam.ac.uk ([128.232.8.88] helo=cl.cam.ac.uk ident=rf) by wisbech.cl.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.092 #1) id 14NtRW-0004Dv-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:20:46 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:20:46 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Robin Fairbairns Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 30 Jan 2001 20:59:58 +0100." <14967.7486.689372.23588@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> > > from the grave, Sebastian > > okay okay, good try to wake the ... from the grave. sebastian as kraken doesn't compute, somehow. > i agree that the missing T1 type1 fonts are a killer --- tend to forget that > every now and then. hrrmph. i only ever use ot1 when i'm producing pdf that needs to use cm-type outlines. > so in other words, to get to a good internal handling i have to find proper > free Type 1 fonts first and make them part of LaTeX. not "part of latex" but "as easily accessible as the ams/y&y/bsr ones are". getting them into every latex distribution then becomes the responsibility of the packagers (who will no doubt make as good a job of it as ever ... i really don't understand how people manage ;-). robin 31-Jan-2001 9:33:48-GMT,2859;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA13207 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:33:46 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V9XEp29302; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:33:14 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA14955; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:33:07 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485291 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:33:06 +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 KAA14948 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:33:04 +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 KAA44078 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:33:05 +0100 Received: from imr2.srv.uk.deuba.com (imr2.srv.uk.deuba.com [194.205.246.161]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V9X0p29226 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:33:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from bmr2-e1.srv.uk.deuba.com by imr2.srv.uk.deuba.com id JAA04914; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:33:02 GMT Received: from sdbo1003.db.com [10.143.26.16] by bmr2-e1.srv.uk.deuba.com id f0V9Wwp20175; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:32:58 GMT X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on sdbo1003/DMGUK/DeuBaInt/DeuBa(Release 5.0.5 |September 22, 2000) at 31/01/2001 09:32:58 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:31:48 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Laurent Nguyen-Ngoc To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Unsubsribe me -- This e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any unauthorised copying, disclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. 31-Jan-2001 9:39:12-GMT,3553;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA13323 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:39:10 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V9cnp00533; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:38:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA15114; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:38:42 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485311 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:38:41 +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 KAA15107 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:38:40 +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 KAA38782 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:38:40 +0100 Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V9cep00473 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:38:40 +0100 (MET) Received: from clipper.ens.fr (clipper-gw.ens.fr [129.199.1.22]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f0V9cd523080 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:38:39 +0100 (CET) Received: from (ebrunet@localhost) by clipper.ens.fr (8.9.2/jb-1.1) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Mutt/1.2i Message-ID: <20010131103838.A5711@clipper.ens.fr> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:38:38 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Eric Brunet Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L (This message didn't seem to go through the first time. Resending it. Sorry if you see it twice.) On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 09:22:55PM +0100, Frank Mittelbach wrote: > i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the default font encoding > from OT1 to T1 so that more people get proper hyphenation without the need to > say > > \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} > > in their documents and would be interested to hear what the opinion on this > list would be (not that i consider this list a representative sample of the > average LaTeX user). Maybe another way to do it is to put it in babel. English writers don't really need T1 fonts, and don't need a change in latex2e right now. But any language in babel could have a default inputenc and fontenc, such that setting \usepackage[francais]{babel} or (german, or any west europe language) would automatically set the T1 fontenc and the latin1 inputenc. Setting \usepackage[russian]{babel} would select a different and suitable (inputenc,fontenc) tupple. -- Éric Brunet 31-Jan-2001 9:47:04-GMT,3420;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA13474 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 02:47:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V9kSp02209; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:46:28 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id KAA15350; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:46:21 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485318 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:46:20 +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 KAA15343 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:46:19 +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 KAA14824 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:46:19 +0100 Received: from wisbech.cl.cam.ac.uk (mta1.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.0.15]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V9kJp02180 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:46:19 +0100 (MET) Received: from pallas.cl.cam.ac.uk ([128.232.8.88] helo=cl.cam.ac.uk ident=rf) by wisbech.cl.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.092 #1) id 14NtqE-0004Xc-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:46:18 +0000 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:46:18 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Robin Fairbairns Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 31 Jan 2001 10:38:38 +0100." <20010131103838.A5711@clipper.ens.fr> in response to > Maybe another way to do it is to put it in babel. English writers don't > really need T1 fonts, and don't need a change in latex2e right now. But > any language in babel could have a default inputenc and fontenc, such > that setting > > \usepackage[francais]{babel} > > or (german, or any west europe language) would automatically set the T1 > fontenc and the latin1 inputenc. Setting > > \usepackage[russian]{babel} > > would select a different and suitable (inputenc,fontenc) tupple. and a french commentary on a russian text would... ? it's not as simple as you imagine (not least because the inputenc side of things is so complicated for russian). denis roegel brought this idea up in pr babel/3046, and there's a pretty clear response from johannes in the database (the response actually appeared this week, and _is_ in the database -- i've just checked). http://www.Uni-Mainz.DE/cgi-bin/ltxbugs2html?pr=babel/3046 31-Jan-2001 9:56:04-GMT,4245;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA12327 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 01:51:26 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V8oop13951; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:50:50 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id JAA13610; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:49:10 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485152 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:49:09 +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 JAA13603 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:49:07 +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 JAA23332 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:49:07 +0100 Received: from relay2.vsu.ru (mail.vsu.ru [62.76.169.17]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0V8mNp13421 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 09:48:32 +0100 (MET) Received: by relay2.vsu.ru (Postfix, from userid 5) id 035381A8E; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:47:58 +0300 (MSK) Received: (from vvv@localhost) by vvv.vsu.ru (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA13708; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:43:39 +0300 X-Authentication-Warning: vvv.vsu.ru: vvv set sender to vvv@vvv.vsu.ru using -f References: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> <14967.8829.903878.620595@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <200101310003.BAA02073@peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de> <14967.46479.253389.421142@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Lines: 34 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-ID: Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:43:37 +0300 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Vladimir Volovich Subject: Re: inputenc -> text+math To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14967.46479.253389.421142@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> "FM" == Frank Mittelbach writes: FM> for "symbols" like the above this can in fact be done this way FM> and a few symbols hare "historically defined this way, ie FM> \pounds -> \relax\ifmmode\mathsterling\else\textsterling FM> but you need the \relax to ensure that the right thing happens at FM> the beginning of tabular cells (timing problem in \halign) FM> and this is the problem: you can't do that to "letters", the use FM> of \relax there prohibits potential ligatures and not doing it FM> means your definition produce wrong results or blow up in certain FM> situations there is a solution for this problem used in the mathtext package available from CTAN:macros/latex/contrib/supported/t2/etc/mathtext.{dtx,ins} this package is referred to as experimental in the doculentation of the cyrillic latex bundle. the approach used in the mathtext package proved to be stable enough: i know a lot of people do use it for `transparent' cyrillic letters in math, and i did not hear about bug for a long time now. the mechanism mostly works on a fontenc layer, rather than on inputenc. so, something like this could be used to make even `letters' work in both modes (however, mathtext currently only redefines \DeclareTextSymbol, which is sufficient for cyrillic, but to make it work for T1 font encoding, one needs to extend redefinitions of other commands like composite declarations, etc). Best regards, -- Vladimir. 31-Jan-2001 10:13:53-GMT,3384;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA14081 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 03:13:51 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VADWp12537; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:13:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id LAA16252; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:13:20 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485356 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:13:19 +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 LAA16245 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:13:17 +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 LAA45552 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:13:18 +0100 Received: from alpha.ntp.springer.de (alpha.ntp.springer.de [192.129.24.9]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VADIp12413 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:13:18 +0100 (MET) Received: from ALPHA.NTP.SPRINGER.DE by ALPHA.NTP.SPRINGER.DE (PMDF V5.2-32 #35169) id <01JZJZKE0WG200087L@ALPHA.NTP.SPRINGER.DE> for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:14:32 MEZ X-VMS-To: IN%"LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE" MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Message-ID: <01JZJZKE0WG400087L@ALPHA.NTP.SPRINGER.DE> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 11:14:32 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: J%ORG KNAPPEN Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Frank Mittelbach schrieb: > \DeclareInputText{189}{\textonehalf} % so that gives an error if placed in > % math > > but > > \DeclareInputMath{185}{\mathonesuperior} > > would that also make an uproar on ctt? i.e., changing the inputencs to be text > objects by default > comments anybody? (Mr. from the grave?) Long time ago, I wrote my own inputenc files making *all* high characters text character. The definition files (latin1jk.def, latin2jk.def, and latin3jk.def) are available from CTAN (latex/contrib/supported/jknappen). If the standard inputenc files are changed, I strongly plea for "dual use" characters. The standard ASCII characters with a few exceptions can be used in text and math as well. A user expects the high character not to be different in this respect. However, the whole setup using active characters makes such kind of change rather difficult. --J"org Knappen 31-Jan-2001 12:04:43-GMT,3247;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA16391 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 05:04:41 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VC3gp21884; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:03:42 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA18560; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:03:30 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485476 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:03:29 +0100 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA18551 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:03:27 +0100 (MET) Received: from blaubaer.kn-bremen.de (blaubaer.kn-bremen.de [195.37.179.254]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VC3Rp21799 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:03:27 +0100 (MET) Received: from dream.kn-bremen.de (uucp@localhost) by blaubaer.kn-bremen.de (8.9.1/8.9.1) with UUCP id NAA03870 for latex-l@relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:03:15 +0100 Received: by dream.kn-bremen.de (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Wed, 31 Jan 01 13:01:46 CET for latex-l@relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de References: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <14967.7486.689372.23588@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> X-Mailer: Helldiver 1.08 (Waffle 1.65) Lines: 23 Message-ID: Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:01:45 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Martin Schroeder Organization: The Dreaming Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In <14967.7486.689372.23588@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Frank Mittelbach writes: >so in other words, to get to a good internal handling i have to find proper >free Type 1 fonts first and make them part of LaTeX. How about these: In Rainer Schoepf writes: >On Mon, 15 Jan 2001, Basil K. Malyshev wrote: >> I have uploaded to ftp.dante.de/incoming/bakoma directory >> EC fonts in ATM compatible Type 1 font format intended for installing >> under BaKoMa TeX 3 and later. >> >> Downloaded files must replace files in 'CTAN:systems/win32/bakoma' directory. >> >> For more information see: >> ftp://ftp.dante.de/tex-archive/systems/win32/bakoma/fonts/ecfonts.html Best regards Martin -- http://www.tm.oneiros.de/calendar/2001/ 31-Jan-2001 12:43:47-GMT,2709;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id FAA17156 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 05:43:46 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VChEp00737; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:43:14 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA19429; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:43:08 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485599 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:43:07 +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 NAA19422 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:43:06 +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 NAA32614 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:43:06 +0100 Received: from plmsc.psu.edu (raman.plmsc.psu.edu [128.118.156.124]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VCh5p00676 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:43:06 +0100 (MET) Received: (from boris@localhost) by plmsc.psu.edu (8.8.7/8.8.7) id HAA18051; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 07:32:53 -0500 Message-ID: <200101311232.HAA18051@plmsc.psu.edu> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 07:32:53 -0500 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Boris Veytsman Subject: Re: default font encoding To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: (message from Martin Schroeder on Wed, 31 Jan 2001 13:01:45 +0100) > From: Martin Schroeder > > How about these: > > >On Mon, 15 Jan 2001, Basil K. Malyshev wrote: > > >> I have uploaded to ftp.dante.de/incoming/bakoma directory > >> EC fonts in ATM compatible Type 1 font format intended for installing > >> under BaKoMa TeX 3 and later. > >> They are not free. -- Good luck -Boris http://www.plmsc.psu.edu/~boris/ 31-Jan-2001 14:00:16-GMT,3477;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id HAA18792 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 07:00:13 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VDxep22604; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:40 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA21233; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:22 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 485822 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:21 +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 OAA21226 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:20 +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 OAA22688 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:20 +0100 Received: from gate.eds.de (gate.eds.de [192.85.16.1]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with SMTP id f0VDxKp22396 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:20 +0100 (MET) Received: from ux28.nets.de.eds.com by gate.eds.de with SMTP id OAA25758 (InterLock SMTP Gateway 4.2 for ); Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:19 +0100 Received: (from pzf5hz@localhost) by ux28.nets.de.eds.com (8.8.6 (PHNE_17135)/8.7.1) id OAA02388; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:18 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: ux28.nets.de.eds.com: pzf5hz set sender to frank.mittelbach@smc.eds.de using -f Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> <14967.8829.903878.620595@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <200101310003.BAA02073@peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de> <14967.46479.253389.421142@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.3.2 Message-ID: <14968.6710.114015.220264@ux28.nets.de.eds.com> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:59:18 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: inputenc -> text+math To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: Vladimir, > there is a solution for this problem used in the mathtext package > available from > CTAN:macros/latex/contrib/supported/t2/etc/mathtext.{dtx,ins} > do you mind outlining the solution in a few sentences? how do you want to be able to find out that you are not in math but will be once something (eg tha actual letter) triggered the \halign u part without actually triggering it (with something like \relax which kills ligaturing)? thanks frank 31-Jan-2001 19:45:47-GMT,4991;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA00593 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 12:45:45 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VJh6p08525; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:43:06 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id UAA27348; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:41:28 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 486362 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:41:27 +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 UAA27341 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:41:25 +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 UAA28614 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:41:26 +0100 Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VJfRp08267 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:41:27 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.204] (helo=mrvdom00.kundenserver.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14O385-00078U-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:41:21 +0100 Received: from manz-3e364815.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.72.21] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14O37u-0007CJ-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:41:10 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id UAA01614; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:35:32 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <200101292234.RAA14964@pluto.math.albany.edu> <14967.8829.903878.620595@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <200101310003.BAA02073@peano.cs.uni-dortmund.de> <14967.46479.253389.421142@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <14968.6710.114015.220264@ux28.nets.de.eds.com> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14968.26883.994029.840070@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 20:35:31 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: inputenc -> text+math To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14968.6710.114015.220264@ux28.nets.de.eds.com> I wrote: > do you mind outlining the solution in a few sentences? how do you want > to be able to find out that you are not in math but will be once > something (eg tha actual letter) triggered the \halign u part without > actually triggering it (with something like \relax which kills > ligaturing)? but by now i got a chance to looked at it. quite a nice idea but i don't think it is fully correct yet. you change \if@mmode at each \halign thus an \halign that doesn't generate math mode cells will have this setting throughout, eg something like \begin{tabular}[t]{..} will have broken text inside, wouldn't it? or do i overlook something? assuming that the analysis is right, what follows is that instead of changing \halign internally you would have to change those uses of \halign where it is needed (only) and that cuts through all existing macros and isn't transparent ie you can't simply get it done by a single package or inclusion of code in the kernel you actually have to change every second use of \halign > the approach used in the mathtext package proved to be stable enough: > i know a lot of people do use it for `transparent' cyrillic letters in > math, and i did not hear about bug for a long time now. the mechanism you don't see the problem unless you look closely at kerning and ligatures (and you use fonts that have them) but it may be the case that this is sufficiently rare with the type of characters it is used so far. with latin fonts i guess this would become far more visible. frank 31-Jan-2001 21:40:01-GMT,4545;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA04537 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 14:39:59 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VLdep11997; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:39:40 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id WAA28731; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:38:34 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 486422 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:38:33 +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 WAA28724 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:38:31 +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 WAA17088 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:38:32 +0100 Received: from moutvdom00.kundenserver.de (moutvdom00.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.149]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VLcWp11819 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:38:32 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.204] (helo=mrvdom00.kundenserver.de) by moutvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14O4xO-0003md-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:38:26 +0100 Received: from manz-3e36485f.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.72.95] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14O4x6-0002f7-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:38:09 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id WAA02948; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:36:06 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <20010131103838.A5711@clipper.ens.fr> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14968.34118.306909.315983@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 22:36:06 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: default inputenc/fontenc tight to language To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: > http://www.Uni-Mainz.DE/cgi-bin/ltxbugs2html?pr=babel/3046 Johannes talkes about the difficulties in providing this, but is it really something one wants? - except when using mule (or emacs) one doesn't (automatically) change input encodings when changing a language in the middle of the document. - beside, even if, for the same language many different input encodings would be in use so you can't even pick a default without making a lot of people unhappy. you can write german using cp437de or latin1 or ansinew or ... depending the OS used or the keyboard or ... - same is true for font encodings: my question about OT1 T1 showed that clearly, some people never use OT1 these days others only (and both writing in the same language) i guess the only way to tie something like this to the language is as an offering, ie by default nothing is tied to a language but you have a mechanism to say that all switches to language X result in switching the inputenc to Y and give the user a chance to specify this in the preamble. and something similar for font encodings the problem with current babel is that for some language you have to do something and so it happens behind the scene but essentially it is not customiable (yet) and restoring state is not always as one would expect. frank 31-Jan-2001 22:01:06-GMT,5515;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA05272 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:01:04 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VM0qp15868; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:00:52 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA28969; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:00:14 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 486442 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:00:14 +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 XAA28960 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:00:12 +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 XAA16576 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:00:12 +0100 Received: from lorraine.loria.fr (lorraine.loria.fr [152.81.1.17]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VM0Dp15601 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:00:13 +0100 (MET) Received: from bar.loria.fr (bar.loria.fr [152.81.2.13]) by lorraine.loria.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3/8.9.3/JCG-DG) with ESMTP id XAA22628; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:00:11 +0100 (MET) Received: (from roegel@localhost) by bar.loria.fr (8.9.3/8.9.3/8.9.3-client/JCG) id XAA09346; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:00:11 +0100 (MET) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <200101312200.XAA09346@bar.loria.fr> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:00:11 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: "Denis B. Roegel" Subject: Re: default inputenc/fontenc tight to language To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <14968.34118.306909.315983@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> from "Frank Mittelbach" at Jan 31, 2001 10:36:06 PM `Frank Mittelbach' wrote > > > http://www.Uni-Mainz.DE/cgi-bin/ltxbugs2html?pr=babel/3046 > > Johannes talkes about the difficulties in providing this, but is it really > something one wants? Well, when I brought up that issue, it was not pure theory. I had a specific example at hand, a Russian colleague who needed to write in Cyrillic/English/French. He writes English in ASCII input encoding, French in ISO-Latin 1 and Russian in KOI8. Moreover, he needs T1 for French (will also do for English) and X2 for Russian. So, I set him up the following commands for English/Russian: \newcommand{\langue}[3]{\inputencoding{#2}\renewcommand\latinencoding{#3}% \fontencoding{#3}\selectfont \selectlanguage{#1}} \newcommand{\anglais}{\langue{english}{ascii}{OT1}} \newcommand{\russe}{\langue{russian}{koi8-r}{X2}} \usepackage[X2,OT1]{fontenc} \usepackage[koi8-r,ascii]{inputenc2} \usepackage[russian,english]{babel} (inputenc2 is a variant of inputenc where you can switch the input encoding within a paragraph; it is possible that there is a standard package achieving this now) > - except when using mule (or emacs) one doesn't (automatically) change input > encodings when > changing a language in the middle of the document. Actually, my colleague uses emacs, but sees only one encoding at a time. For instance, with a KOI8 setting, he won't see correctly French accented letters. I have never been able to find out if it is possible to have local 8 bit encodings within an emacs document. It should be possible, though. Anyway, that's a different matter. (I am not speaking of the MULE extensions, which alter your encoding.) > i guess the only way to tie something like this to the language is as an > offering, ie by default nothing is tied to a language but you have a mechanism > to say that all switches to language X result in switching the inputenc to Y > and give the user a chance to specify this in the preamble. > > and something similar for font encodings > > the problem with current babel is that for some language you have to do > something and so it happens behind the scene but essentially it is not > customiable (yet) and restoring state is not always as one would expect. Yes, I had such a problem with differed layouts like the table of contents. For instance, say you have a French, then a Russian section. If you write switch encoding to French \tableofcontents \section{French} switch encoding to Russian \section{Russian} you'll end up with `French' appearing in Cyrillic, because the state at the end of the \tableofcontents is not restored. You have to add an explicit change of encoding, for instance after \tableofcontents, or at the end of your document. Denis 31-Jan-2001 22:28:54-GMT,5416;000000000001 Return-Path: Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by sunshine.math.utah.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA06305 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 15:28:52 -0700 (MST) Received: from relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (relay-eth.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.201]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VMSbp26650; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:28:37 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay (relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.201]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id XAA29251; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:27:58 +0100 (MET) Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 486450 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:27:57 +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 XAA29244 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:27:56 +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 XAA54726 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:27:57 +0100 Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0VMRvp26395 for ; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:27:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.204] (helo=mrvdom00.kundenserver.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14O5jD-000738-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:27:51 +0100 Received: from manz-3e364736.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.71.54] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom00.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14O5im-0003uL-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:27:24 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id XAA03139; Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:25:29 +0100 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <01JZJZKE0WG400087L@ALPHA.NTP.SPRINGER.DE> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 Message-ID: <14968.37081.627751.44527@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 23:25:29 +0100 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project From: Frank Mittelbach Subject: Re: inputenc text (and/or math) To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L In-Reply-To: <01JZJZKE0WG400087L@ALPHA.NTP.SPRINGER.DE> J%ORG KNAPPEN writes: > Long time ago, I wrote my own inputenc files making *all* high characters > text character. The definition files (latin1jk.def, latin2jk.def, > and latin3jk.def) are available from CTAN > (latex/contrib/supported/jknappen). > something like this yes (perhaps even exactly this) > If the standard inputenc files are changed, I strongly plea for "dual use" > characters. The standard ASCII characters with a few exceptions can be used > in text and math as well. A user expects the high character not to be > different > in this respect. depends on what dual means. if you mean that you want the result of a key mapping (eg \"a) be available text or math then i'm not. i strongly plea for math only accepts the small set of real ascii, ie 0-9 a-z A-Z !"/()=?`'+*<>|,;.:- plus commands by default (repeat: default). the set of exceptions is a) not well-defined an b) potentially unlimited and thus even more difficult to explain than anything else. because what you are really have to do then is to make all font encoding specific commands available in math and that doesn't work, a lot have to equivalent there. > However, the whole setup using active characters makes such kind of change > rather difficult. it is not so much that but the question what \c{c} should mean in math, should it map to \mbox{\c{c}}? probably not; should \"a map to \ddot\a ? perhaps. what about \`\^{a} as supported by T5 Vietnamese? right now there are roughly 900+ font-encoding-specific commands, i want to keep those text (only). so i don't think "math" should be regarded as another "fontencoding" though that would be possible in theory. instead i would think something like \DeclareInputTextAndMath should be offered for those languages/keyboards where a dual nature for input "keys" really makes sense, greek and cyrillic comes to mind. but i would consider this a dual mapping from input "key" to either a text command (if in text) or a math command if in math, eg \DeclareInputTextAndMath{}{\textalpha}{\alpha} you may have meant that as well, have you? i still feel that for something like latin1 this doesn't make much and i would prefer to see only \DeclareInputText there but ... frank