LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

 Options: Use Forum View Use Monospaced Font Show Text Part by Default Show All Mail Headers Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>] Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>] Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

 Subject: Re: latex/3480: Support for UTF-8 missing in inputenc.sty From: Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]> Reply To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 23:56:38 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain Parts/Attachments: text/plain (134 lines)
Dominique wrote:
> > [aside, where is that file, the one that i have here is very short
> > and doesn't contain \euro but neither looks like a proper encoding
> > file either]
>
> Yes. I'm sorry, I seem to have mixed. It was the eurofont package
> that used the \euro command. But it shows the problem nevertheless.

not quite so. i agree \euro is not perfect here. but that package explicitly
does not attempt to set up an encoding specific command but a command
independent of encodings at least that is the way i see it (tonight :-)

> > > [about incompatible double definitions of Unicode chars]

> In this case there should be at least some checking of redefinition,
> like
>
> \def\DeclareUnicodeCharacter...{%
> ...
>   \output@fierce@warning@or@error\fi\fi
> ...}

yes we could do that as it happens only at declaration time this is a onetime
effort so no problem

>
> > > [about generating .dfu files by a script]
> > a ucs.map file that contains the mappings Unicode->LICR  in the form directly
> > usable in .dfu files, simply as a template for making a .dfu if really
> > necessary.
> >
> > perhaps using docstrip to generate the standard dfu files from that
> > file
>
> Yes. I like that approach. In fact, this is like just implementing the
> "script" in LaTeX.

if you use that generic idea of a script :-) then we are proposing the same i
guess

> >  > There are already extensive lists of character mappings available at:
> >  > http://www.unruh.de/DniQ/latex/unicode/content/config/
> > so there is, worth stealing from
>
> Perhaps I should add, that some of the macros rely on fontencodings
> written by my own
> (http://www.unruh.de/DniQ/latex/unicode/content/contrib) and some need
> extended fontencodings
> (http://www.unruh.de/DniQ/latex/unicode/content/ucsencs.def contains
> the additional macros), where the fontencodings are not complete
> enough (e.g. LGR).

yes understood from what i saw

> > would it be possible for you to give use a ten line bullet list of
> > comparsion?
>
> I will do so in the next days.

fine

> > perhaps the best is simply to forget about what we did on lazy afternoons
> > during the Xmas holidays?
>
> I don't think so. My package has one big disadvantage: Since it tries
> do support all and everything, it is huge and slow (and probably full
> of bugs). I don't think, it is suited for inclusion into the LaTeX
> kernel itself.
>
> I see it more as an alternative, in case that you need advanced
> features.

that was what i thought too, good that we didn't step on your toes then by
proposing something else

> >  > - \DeclareUnicodeCharacter: This command is named identically in my
> >  > system. I would appreciate if another name could be chosen at this
> >
> > what are your arguments?
>
> Two scenarios:

sorry, misunderstanding, i meant quite literally the semantics of the
arguments for your \DeclareUnicodecharacter macro, ie what goes into #1 ...

> 1. Someone uses that command in some package or document. Then using the wrong
>
> 2. Someone tries to use both inputencs in a single document. (Perhaps
> because he wants to typeset most of the document with the fast
> in-kernel implementation, and some few strings containing combining
> chars with my implementation).

question is how both could coexist and if they can whether they can use the
same database of  \DeclareUnicodecharacter declarations rather than doubling
the space

> >  > \DeclareUnicodeCommand (analogous to \DeclareTextCommand)
> > no again Command in that context has already some semantics
>
> Which?

\...Command has been used always to refer to the more generalised version of
something, eg

%    |\DeclareTextComposite| is the most common example of using
%    the more general declaration
%    |\DeclareTextCompositeCommand|, which can define a composite

where rather than having the target definition part very much in a defined
syntax the "Command" version allows general code

> >  \DeclareUnicodeLaTeXMapping
>
> Or:
> \DeclareUnicodeMapping % the LaTeX may be guessed
> \DeclareUnicodeInput % like in inputenc
> \DeclareUnicodeInputText % like in inputenc

neither sounds too bad :-) but too late at night for me to really think about
it

frank