Hi, Let’s leave this for further study. :polyglossia positive hits cover a significant amount of languages. In cases they don’t, I’d rather have people asking. Thus we can suggest then to use their own name and report back. We, in turn, can collect the alternatives and decide afterwards. I have worked through the “canonical” examples in manuals, wiki books and overleaf.com int the last months. There are some examples for languages where you can go the way you prefer (i.e. use :language or :script _or even a tag you define_). Look at the paragraph and example with Hindi. My fear is that more experienced users will feel constrained and turn away. It’s better to include this optional :script for this particular reason.
/PA Enviado desde mi iPad > El 24 nov 2025, a las 20:44, Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]> escribió: > > Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]> writes: > >> Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez <[email protected]> writes: >> >>> Isn’t it much safer to provide the extra information in the font >>> configuration for a start? >> >> I am not sure. It feels like it is not really related to font, but >> simply some kind of per-language constant. Please let me know if I am >> wrong. (I am quite confused about the intricacies of these font thingies) > > Ok. I am wrong: > ("hi" :babel "hindi" :polyglossia "hindi" :lang-name "Hindi" :script > "devanagari" :script-tag "deva") > > but we need to use "devanagari", not "hindi" that is the value of > :polyglossia. > > Still, I feel like such kind of information belongs to > `org-latex-language-alist' (maybe a new field like :polyglossia-script?). > > -- > Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, > Org mode maintainer, > Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. > Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, > or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
