Wed, 2 Feb 2000 23:03:13 +0100
sorry to disappoint you but I would like to answer both suggestions with no.
here are the arguments:
> > > It kind of feels wrong to me to open up that name space just to be able to
> > > support \"A as an instance name --- but convince me otherwise :-)
> No but it should support Ä.
it should not. template names are abstract names of the language and I like
the language portable and this means 7bit visible ascii plus a few extra
chars, just like label names. I'm not at all in favour of supporting inputenc
8 bit in such places.
we can talk about that if there is an accepted successor of TeX that uses
unicode as input language.
this does not mean that i'm against Ruben's suggested special interface to
initials (or a variation of it)
> Many such problems should go away if a font encoding such as T1 or LY1 is
> used. Perhaps T1 should be made the norm for latex2e*?
many problems should go away if we switch to T1 or even something better than
T1 but at least a standard 8bit font encoding. but these are different
problems that are solved by that switch.
now the NO is the following: NO 2e* will not do that switch. 2e* (and this is
why it is called 2e*) will be a package based extension of 2e. in other words
it will run completely on a 2e kernel (and therefore run everywhere where 2e
is installed and at most you have to download a few extra package to compile a
document based on it).
once it is have tested and used for a while I then intend to write a new
kernel that actually supports it natively, that kernel then may as well switch
the basic encoding but not the 2e* i'm currently trying to build up (with your
open to discuss those points but note that I will vanish for a few days to
work on output routines and front matter. so don't be surprised that i haven't
replied to other mails and will not reply for any to any mail