LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Hans Aberg <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 11 Feb 2001 21:29:56 +0100
In-Reply-To:
Reply-To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (32 lines)
At 16:30 +0100 2001/02/11, Frank Mittelbach wrote:
> wouldn't it be better if the internal LaTeX representation would be Unicode
> in one or the other flavor?
>
>in other words, instead of using \"a as the representation for umlaut-a use
>something like
>
>   \unicode{00e4}
>or \uc00e4        % (as a command)
>or \utfviii{...}
...
> - however, not clear is that the resulting names are easier to read, eg
>   \unicode{00e4} viz \"a.
...
> - the current latex internal representation is richer than unicode for good
>   or worse, eg \" is defined individually as representation for accenting the
>   next char, which means that anything \"<base-char-in-the-internal-reps> is
>   automatically also a member of it, eg \"g.
...
>comments?

There is this variation that one defines \u00e4 commands for Unicode
compatibility. Then in some environment, one defines " as a letter, with
  \let\"a=\u00E4
etc., and in other environments \" is the usual control sequence.

Thus, if one is in the environment where " is a letter, if some combination
\x does not work, one will know that the Unicode version is not available,
and one has to invoke another environment to handle that.

  Hans Aberg

ATOM RSS1 RSS2