Is there no other way that the issues you have could be addressed
without introducing TeX-XeT?
The more we look at this the more it seems a very unfortunate step,
introducing several incompatibilities
with pdftex and luatex.
Especially if there is a possibility of moving in the end to an
Omega/lu
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 04:29:47PM +0100, David Carlisle wrote:
> Is there no other way that the issues you have could be addressed
> without introducing TeX-XeT?
I first reported this issue in 2008, 7 years ago, so it seems it is not
going to go way magically, much to my surprise. Peter Breitenlo
On 15 April 2015 at 20:05, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 04:29:47PM +0100, David Carlisle wrote:
>> Is there no other way that the issues you have could be addressed
>> without introducing TeX-XeT?
>
> I first reported this issue in 2008, 7 years ago, so it seems it is not
> going
Might it not be possible to resolve this by making the new behaviour
optional, using a new primitive for the purpose ?
Philip Taylor
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:44:12PM +0100, David Carlisle wrote:
> On 15 April 2015 at 20:05, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 04:29:47PM +0100, David Carlisle wrote:
> >> Is there no other way that the issues you have could be addressed
> >> without introducing TeX-XeT?
> >
> > I fi
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:52:38PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote:
> Might it not be possible to resolve this by making the new behaviour
> optional, using a new primitive for the purpose ?
So this just penalizes the unlucky people who need to enable the special
behaviour, I’d rather penalize everyone
> It is either that or live with dysfunctional right-to-left support in
> XeTeX, it is obvious which one I’m going to chose, sorry.
Yes sure, sometimes you just have to make choices and live with them,
I understand that.
Let me go and read some of those issues, thanks for the pointer,
David
-
Khaled Hosny wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:52:38PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote:
>> Might it not be possible to resolve this by making the new behaviour
>> optional, using a new primitive for the purpose ?
>
> So this just penalizes the unlucky people who need to enable the special
> behav
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 09:07:05PM +0100, David Carlisle wrote:
> Let me go and read some of those issues, thanks for the pointer,
Just in case it is not clear why reviving the long dead TeX-XeT is a fix
here; TeX-XeT does not do any actual reversal but rather outputs special
opcodes in the DVI fi
> I do not understand. If system A performed function Y until now, yet
> its designer/maintainer wishes it to perform function Y' henceforth
Khaled's point is that XeTeX did not work correctly on the issue at
hand until he made the change we're discussing. It's unfair to
characterise his chang
Hi all,
I do not want to vote but I feel that TeX behaviour was really wrong. When
I type an English paragraph quoting in a middle of a sentence an Urdu text
آپ جآمع مسجد کی مینار پر جا کستِ ہِں without special LTR/RTL markup, the
output will be incorrect although I see it right in the text editor
On 15 April 2015 at 21:18, Khaled Hosny wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 09:07:05PM +0100, David Carlisle wrote:
>> Let me go and read some of those issues, thanks for the pointer,
>
> Just in case it is not clear why reviving the long dead TeX-XeT is a fix
> here; TeX-XeT does not do any actual r
On 15 April 2015 at 21:36, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I do not want to vote but I feel that TeX behaviour was really wrong. When I
> type an English paragraph quoting in a middle of a sentence an Urdu text آپ
> جآمع مسجد کی مینار پر جا کستِ ہِں without special LTR/RTL markup, the output
>
On 15 April 2015 at 21:19, Philip Taylor wrote:
>
>
> Khaled Hosny wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:52:38PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote:
>
>>> Might it not be possible to resolve this by making the new behaviour
>>> optional, using a new primitive for the purpose ?
>>
>> So this just penalize
David Carlisle wrote:
> Khaled will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the change
> affects this case, (internally the mechanism is different, but input and
> output is the same).
In that case (and this is partially off-topic), what is the correct
mechanism by which one should instruct
David Carlisle wrote:
> Phil, it's hard to argue that working right-to-left text should be an
> opt-in (or even opt-out)
> feature of xetex. I may wish for an ideal world in which this could be
> fixed another way,
> but I don't think an option would help at all.
Fair enough. My thought was si
> In that case (and this is partially off-topic), what is the correct
> mechanism by which one should instruct XeTeX (current version : TL-2014)
> to reverse that stretch of text ?
\beginR, \endR, it's in the subject of this thread.
>I have a 544pp book that
> Fair enough. My thought was simply that if a sufficiently large number
> of users are dependent (even tacitly) on the current behaviour, then
> opting-in to the new should not be out of the question ...
That's the eternal question, isn't it - to which extend should a buggy
behaviour be preser
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 09:45:32PM +0100, David Carlisle wrote:
> On 15 April 2015 at 21:36, Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I do not want to vote but I feel that TeX behaviour was really wrong. When I
> > type an English paragraph quoting in a middle of a sentence an Urdu text آپ
> > جآم
\font\x="Arial" at 12pt
\x
two verses:\beginR ק את אשפן וכ' ופסוק ואת הארנבת\endR; f.≈89r:
\bye
On 15 April 2015 at 21:54, Philip Taylor wrote:
>
>
> David Carlisle wrote:
>
>> Khaled will correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the change
>> affects this case, (internally the mechanism is
On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 09:19:04PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote:
>
>
> Khaled Hosny wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:52:38PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote:
>
> >> Might it not be possible to resolve this by making the new behaviour
> >> optional, using a new primitive for the purpose ?
> >
>
I also support Khaled's changes to xetex; I only tested it few months ago
and if the issues I reported are fixed now, then it is good. And since when
LaTeX has a package/ or test files that uses \beginL \endL? All I remember
is that there are only babel's rlbabel.def file and then arabicore package
On 16/04/2015 01:21, Vafa Khalighi wrote:
> And since when
> LaTeX has a package/ or test files that uses \beginL \endL?
The kernel doesn't use any directional features. However, it does have a
large set of tests, some of which cover math mode: nny change to the
\showoutput result will show up. To
23 matches
Mail list logo
