Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> No, the patterns should work just fine with a large alphabet. This part I do not understand, Mojca; surely the patterns /define/ the size of the alphabet, do they not ? If letter <xqqyn> is not in the patterns, then TeX cannot hyphenate a word containing letter <xqqyn>, can it ? > 2.) The fact that "patgen" is limited, "opatgen" is defunct and > nobody else stepped up yet to create a new tool in some modern > programming language with built-in Unicode support (or with some > modern C(++) libraries) has nothing to do with XeTeX's ability to > interpret patterns. If we don't have a tool that can generate > patterns for large alphabets that doesn't mean that XeTeX cannot > handle such patterns. It was, in part, the existence or otherwise of such a tool that interested me, as well as whether XeTeX could natively handle such patterns were they to be generatable ... A /very/ quick look at Patgen.web suggests (to me) that a re-implementation in Perl might be the fastest way forward (Patgen is run so infrequently that the run-time overheads of an interpreted language are irrelevant) but I regret I have too much on my plate at the moment to volunteer to investigate further. > The patterns can probably be created with patgen with some ugly > tweaking (as Jonathan suggested). That is indeed seriously ugly. The sooner the whole of the TeX suite has native UTF-8 clones, the more chance there is of TeX surviving into the 22nd century, it seems to me. ** Phil.
