Uwe Stöhr wrote: > We had this topic recently on the list and also in stackexchange. LuaTeX is > not able to handle RTL languages properly, no matter if polyglossia is > used. There is an experimental package called luabidi but this is not even > in beta state according to their developers.
Well, I browsed the Internet as well, and I figured several people use LuaLaTeX succesfully for Hebrew. > > It's an alphabetic script. Not every alphabetic script is Roman (e.g. > > Cyrillic, Hebrew, Greek). > > They defined Greek as non-Roman because some words require the change of > characters. So for example Fraktur is in their definition also non-Roman > because the "s" is a different character depending on the position in the > word. Maybe the name non-Roman is misleading but they did not say > non-Latin. Could you please point me to that discussion? I've read dozens of books about script theory and history, and I've never came across a categorization of this kind. It strikes me highly odd. In any case, this is not the common meaning of the term. > >> I understand your technical distinguishing but for the user dviluatex > >> appears as default: He checks the non-Tex fonts option and presses the > >> view button afterwards and gets dvilutatex. So it appears for him as the > >> default output format. > > > > But we two discuss here as developers on a devel list, so please be > > technically precise. > > OK. But you got my point. I would have gotten your point faster if you would have said: "We need to implement a way to set a default output format for non-TeX fonts" rather than stating "We set the wrong default output format for non-TeX fonts". > But to come back to the original topic, could you please have a look and > revise http://wiki.lyx.org/LyX/XeTeX > if you have some time? I'll see if I find some. Jürgen > thanks and regards > Uwe
