Vit Zyka wrote:
Hans Hagen wrote:
I wonder,
\definecharacter Aring {\ilencodedrA}
\definecharacter Lstroke {\ilencodedL} \definecharacter lstroke {\ilencodedl}
where do these come from? is that because csr does not provide those glyphs?
il2 encoding is not ISO-8859-2 but encoding of CS fonts (csr...). It was derived from ISOO-8859-2 but:
- first 128 glyphs are the same as cmr...
- upper part is added according to ISO-8859-2 (http://nl.ijs.si/gnusl/cee/charset.html) but only chars needed for Czech/Slovak lang.
Neither Aring is present in CSfont, nor Lstroke, nor lstroke.
(which makes il2 like aer (almoet ec) something almost il2 -)
I wonder, why don't you use the more recent qx encoding;
if il2 is only used for csr, then we can best extend il2 encoding since all the chars missing in csr are present in latin modern;
Problem is that il2 and ISO-8859-2 differs in next chars presented in il2: dec ISO CS 184 cedilla \`a 254 tcedilla dblleftquote 255 dot above dblrightquote
...
After some quotes (e.g. Adams'
> "The Polish prefer it more upright. The Czechs prefer it more flat."
) I feel stronger and stronger that csr should coexist with lm for future. Perhaps like a option (not present in minimal distr?), but with full functionality if extra loaded.
So I would like il2 will be preserved as it is and new coding according to lm (ISO-8859-2 ?) would be introduce (enco-l2 ?).
Vit _______________________________________________ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
