Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez <[email protected]> writes: >> >> More general comments: >> >> 1. Do you have specific objections to discussing babel and polyglossia >> >> first, and moving fontspec/nil to the end? >> > In the scope of font definitions: polyglossia can be used for the >> > secondary languages, while keeping the main language handled by >> > fontspec... still experimenting with babel, but I haven't seen >> > anywhere that it couldn't... >> >> This does not sound right. I think you are mixing font configuration and >> localization. fontspec cannot set localization. So, even for >> single-language document, you may need to load polyglossia or babel >> simply to setup correct pagination, punctuation, etc. >> As a simple example, consider a document written in British >> English. There will be 0 problems with fonts, but you still need >> babel/polyglossia to setup for subtle differences in punctuation rules. > > No, I'm not, I'm talking about font management only. > What I'm saying is that fontspec will control the fonts used for the > main language while polyglossia will control the fonts for the > secondary language(s). > You are right in saying that in a BE document, I can use lualatex, > fontspec to set the fonts and polyglossia for the localisation only, > but I was only talking about fonts here. > I reckon it is a fluid frontier there and that is the difficulty here.
I feel that the main focus of the section should go to localization, mostly deferring the discussion about font setup to dedicated sections. In this view, fontspec option is mostly for the cases when localization is not necessary. That's why I suggested putting it later in the section, after discussing babel and polyglossia. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode maintainer, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
