Uwe Stöhr wrote: > > But the most important point is that your additions will screw > > up any document that is e.g. english and uses a single armenian > > character. > > But for this there is the ERT-command "\armoff". I have a template file > ready to describe this and will also describe this in the Wiki as I did > already for Hebrew, Arabic and kyrillic.
Hacks like that have IMHO nothing to do in the official sources. I guess that it would cost a similar amount of time to implement armtex support properly as documenting the hacks in the wiki. > > IMO the unicode file should only contain safe commands that do not > > change any other parts of the text. The armtex package redefines plain > > ASCII characters, so they are not suitable for the unicode file. > > OK, but one or two weeks ago I asked you how to do this and you told be I > should do this in the unicodesymbols file. Sorry that I have misunderstood > you. Yes, I wrote that, but I did not know the armtex package then and assumed that you would not add anything that has side effects. > > Proper support would be done with a new encoding and without anything > > in the unicode file, like in this file: > > http://www.ctan.org/tex-archive/language/armtex/v2.0/examples/latex/raffi.tex > > I'll have a look again. Note that my sentence above is wrong, I did not think about other encoding settings than 'auto'. So it is still desirable to have these symbols in the unicode file in addition to the solution with the encoding, but with real commands and without side effects. The encoding stuff would be a file format change, have a look at the patch in bug 3043 for a lyx2lyx template. Georg
