LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


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 >>]

Print Reply
Elie Roux <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Tue, 24 Mar 2009 13:33:36 +0100
text/plain (31 lines)
Manuel Pégourié-Gonnard a écrit :
> No one (at least not me) wants to impede progress. luainputenc and 
> xetexinputenc
> are interesting and I'm glad they are being developed. The question is: Would it
>  be a real progress to have them called 'inputenc' (by whatever mechanism such
> as kpse search path or something like Élie's suggestion)?
> In the current state of the packages, I don't think it would be a progress to
> change the name to inputenc. And I also think there's no need to hurry deciding
> whether it is a progress or not.

In the future LuaTeX will probably replace pdfTeX, so inputenc will load 
luainputenc. The question is not really to decide if it's good or not, 
it's to decide when we will do it. And I still can't really see why we 
should wait three more years...

> If the user is aware enough of what's going on, she is probably able to
> understand that she should use luainputenc instead of inputenc (or, much better,
> (re-)encode her source as utf-8 and stop using *inputenc).

Just to repeat myself: (lua)inputenc is not optional in most cases, so 
the user will have to load luainputenc. This means that people working 
with LuaLaTeX will have to change their documents in 2012, replacing 
luainputenc by inputenc... I know it's not 100% stable so users must 
know what they're doing, but it still seems more annoying than the 
miracle solution for stability...