--- On Fri, 9/12/11, Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> wrote: > > If you are not making it easy to try out to see how it > might be an > > interesting alternative (which may or may not be true) > compared to > > XeTeX and CJK, you have lost your potential users > before you never > > start. > > What you say is too harsh IMHO. Just think of my CJK > package! It's > *extremely* hard to set it up from scratch due to the many > fonts you > need. > > You are just describing another reason to make swath part > of TeXLive. > On the other hand, a probably better strategy would be to > convert > cttex or swath into a lua script: > > . It's *much* easier to add a script to TeXLive than > a binary. > > . This script could then be rather easily modified > so that it can be > incorporated into a forthcoming luatex Thai > support.
Harsh admittently, but those are things that needed to be said. As you would recall, my interest in CJK was primarily almost a decade ago. Even then, I did manage to get CJk mostly working outside of TEXMF, so ThaiLaTeX has a lot of catching up to do. Since then, star-office/openoffice/libreoffice has happened, which make life a lot easier in the "OSS" world to do MS-office things (and there is latex2rtf, which seems to be a bit stagnant); and XeTeX has happened. Swath as it currently is, depends a lot on GNU libtools and autoconf. That's not very supportive of the other platforms that TexLive needs to support. _______________________________________________ Cjk maillist - Cjk@ffii.org https://lists.ffii.org/mailman/listinfo/cjk
