Philipp Stephani wrote: > Am 06.03.2011 18:18, schrieb Arno Trautmann: >> >> I find this horrible. It would be easy if the standard engine would be >> luaTeX with pdf output and other machines could be used as pdflatex3 or >> similar. > > I agree that LuaTeX with PDF output is the most (only?) sensible choice, > but if the L3 team chooses to support legacy engines and output formats, > I have no objection to the proposed syntax with command line switches. I.e. latex3 as default for luatex + pdf + latex3 and everything else with switches? That would be fine for me, too. > The main latex3 program will probably have to be a Lua wrapper script > anyway because of the things the engines won't do: re-running the engine > when needed, formatting error messages, computing the correct command > line arguments for the engine. Sounds sensible. >>> an so forth (with --xetex ignoring --dvi for the obvious reasons). Does >>> a similar scheme make sense for a hypothetical 'latex2x'? (I'm going >>> with 'x' for 'extended', and also for 'like LaTeX2e, but clearly a bit >>> further along. Of course, there would need to be some defaults for the >>> above - I guess I'd favour pdfTeX in PDF mode at present. >> >> For l2x (I like the name!), I'd stick with the names as they are. > > I don't know. I'd like to see latex2x using LuaTeX as default engine, > too. Since today LuaTeX already supports everything that pdfTeX and > XeTeX has (and much more), I see no point in using the old engines any > more if there is no need for backward compatibility. The only point for > pdfTeX is that LuaTeX is still beta, but since L2e will stay, I don't > see many problems here; LuaTeX is stable enough, and the l2x manual can > contain an appropriate warning. Stability cannot be a point here as l2x will never be considered a stable format. (At least I hope so, in contrary to l2ε) Before starting, it should be clear who would be the users/testers of l2x – is a manual needed? l2x does not do anything more than 2ε + expl3 does and both are well documented … >>> Second question: anything else that should be included that is not in >>> the combined 'release' material (expl3, xparse, xtemplate, xcoffins)? >>> These do load various bits and pieces (for example, graphicx), but I'd >>> like to at least add fixltx2e to the above. >> >> As Philipp suggested, fontspec for luaTeX and XeTeX engines. Maybe even >> xltxtra for XeTeX and some lua packages for luaTeX? But that is no >> LaTeX3 stuff anymore … > > expl3 already loads the luatex package. Maybe Heiko should be made a > honorary member of the L3 team, then the L2x format could include the > whole oberdiek bundle... If they are useful and often used? In the end, it should be rewritten and added to the kernel, no? > fontspec is written by Will who is a member of the L3 team, so that > would be no problem. It would essentially be NFSSv3 for LuaTeX. > xltxtra replaces kernel macros such as \textsuperscript, I think that is > not something we want by default. Yes, right. One question here: Having fontspec loaded in the format, what happens if a package \Requires fontspec? Is it loaded again? Or can loading then be prevented? > fontspec loads luaotfload which depends on luatexbase. Currently there > are some conflicts between luatex and luatexbase that should be fixed. > Other packages by MPG would be nice, too, e.g. luacode. Indeed! > If we think even further, the L3 team might choose to lift several > popular and high-quality packages to semi-official status by including > them in the format, e.g. Philipp Lehman's packages, mathtools, the > oberdiek bundle, xcolor, TikZ, siunitx... I was thinking about this, but that would go too far. At least for a short-term test version, that would be too much packages. For long-term considerations, they would be nice to have in the format – but this would blow up the size strongly, wouldn't it? We could imagine a "plain LaTeX" format without them and a "bloated LaTeX" including … ;) > Fixltx2e has already been mentioned and would probably the first > candidate for inclusion in the format. Yes. Cheers Arno