David Carlisle writes: > But whether the internal > canonical form is a unicode number or a latex style 7bit string \'e > the issues of mapping between input encodings and this internal form, > and from there to font encodings, are probably about the same. But isn't \'e an abbreviation for \acute{e}, and don't the French conceptualize it as an accented 'e'? And isn't that a better way to handle this particular thing when the author thinks of it as an accented 'e' rather than as a different character? I see \'e and \uE9 as formally different things, which probably should be typeset the same way by TeX in this case since \uE9 is a legacy hack for handling \'e . -- Bill