On 9/10/2010 8:59 PM, Diederick C. Niehorster wrote:
Hmm, in the view that this is a large undertaking, I would vote for
focusing on that which works uniformaly accross platforms first. such
additional, platform specific information can be added later, possbily
marked by an apple, windows symbol or tux in the margin to mark which
platform its intended for.
Windows and Linux work the same, don't they, since they both use the ICU
renderer? And the number of AAT-specific things that fontspec supports
is quite small, so this really isn't much of an issue. But we can't
ignore those few things; for instance, a Mac user must know whether or
not to include [script= ] in a fontspec command if text in a complex
script is to be processed correctly.
While realizing that indeed many come to xe(la)tex with little to no
background in (la)tex, being myself one of those, I do think it might
be best to start work on the more xe(la)tex specific parts. Given the
outline proposed, it might be best to start by filling in those parts
on which we see most questions on the list here and only after fan out
to discussing packages that work equally well on latex.
This makes sense.
David
--------------------------------------------------
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
