On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Claudio Beccari wrote: > > The behavior that Karl described while starting this thread is hardwired in > the pattern files themselves; but what astonished me is discovering that > dehypht.tex is still using special tricks to cope with TeX 2.0. Now, > independently form the specific patterns, is there any reason to maintain > any patch to cope with a piece of software that ha been superseded more than > 25 years ago?
- no extra work to be done, just take that ancient file and don't try to even start maintaining the files - it works, so why bother - the hope that we'll be able to "get rid" of those patterns in some not too distant future > Isn't much simpler to filter the pattern file for utf-8 aware > programs through the utf8 to t1 encoding and have the same patterns (coded > in a different way) for all engines? No, it is not simpler. We would have to do extra work. Not that extra work is a problem, but we would have to maintain five German pattern files instead of three with super weird language code (de-1901-x-legacytex?), and why would anyone working with XeTeX/LuaTeX even want outdated/inferior patterns anyway? Not touching the old German patterns was a somewhat deliberate decision, hoping that we'll be able to switch to the new ones some time soon. Mojca
