> On Thursday 17 July 2003 11:10, Torsten Bronger wrote: > > > Surprisingly enough, TeX is the most serious limitation at the > > moment (of course also because it's so vital). It's still the best > > back-end for typesetting something, however its treatment of > > so-called special characters, lack of true unicode support, and the > > distinction text/math mode is really unfortunate. > > Wouldn't "true unicode support" require fonts with 64000 glyphs? it needs fonts with as many glyphs as your documents need. unicode has more than one plane, now, anyway. but you're right: the potential for type designers is awesome. > And isn't it quite sensible to distinguish between text and maths? i was wondering about that, too. do you actually _do_ maths, torsten? robin