LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for LATEX-L Archives


LATEX-L Archives

LATEX-L Archives


LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

LATEX-L Home

LATEX-L Home

LATEX-L  February 2001

LATEX-L February 2001

Subject:

Re: default inputenc/fontenc tight to language

From:

Frank Mittelbach <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Thu, 1 Feb 2001 10:48:37 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (82 lines)

Denis,

 > Well, when I brought up that issue, it was not pure theory.

didn't expect it otherwise.

 > (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)

think it is called inputenc these days

 > 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.

basically what you are saying is that moving text needs to keep information
about its state with it, right? it fortunately doesn't need to keep
information about its input encoding since that got all normalised into the
internal representation but unfortunately you need to keep information about
the encoding used (or rather the encoding intended)

a bit inconsistent that, isn't it? but would it help if the language has a tie
to the encoding?

i think current babel would handle the toc example right (if the output
encoding is set by the language) but i guess this would not be true for mark
entries.


concerning the output encoding: assuming there is something like
\languagefontencoding which is either unset or set (per language) and if set
results in a change to the font encoding whenever a language switch happens.
(if unset for a language that should probably mean revert to the document
default encoding).

for languages like Russian things are relatively clear (though not really
either) since due to the limitation of TeX we are forced to select an
encoding, so there the language might as well provide a default like T2A, but
for German this it is not the case, ie one can type in OT1, T1, or even OT4.

a scheme like the above would then do well enough but the user
still has to make some font encoding decisions (like what is the default font
encoding, or do i want T1 with english ...)

however it would be far nicer if TeX (or LaTeX) would be able to take a bit of
text written in the internal LaTeX representation (plus language tags), ie
ascii + font encoding specific commands and automagically figures out behind
the scene how to typeset the lot. only i can't see how to make this happen
more automatically with the above scheme, which requires a) language tags and
b) potentially customisation in the preamble.

a lot of people find (and i agree) that

 \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}

is already to much to expect (and difficult or impossible to explain) --- and
why should a user be concerned with it?

but then, the same people have diametral ideas what are the right values of
fontencodings for a certain language: just look at the different opinions on
this list concerning French and OT1 or T1.

so we have to offer a choice, question is, is there a better way to present
it?


frank

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

September 2019
July 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
July 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
September 2007
August 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
November 2004
October 2004
August 2004
July 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
October 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
March 2002
December 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Universität Heidelberg | Impressum | Datenschutzerklärung

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager