On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 2:35 AM, Philip TAYLOR <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Chris Travers wrote: >> >> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 2:24 AM, Petr Tomasek<[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Using different color. >>> >> Do we really want to tie XeTeX users to a small number of editors? > > No. But nor do we want to preclude the possibility of > someone taking UTF-8 containing these "magic" characters > from somewhere and pasting it into a XeTeX document. > So it is essential that we support these magic characters > in some way. In the long term, enhancements to the > XeTeX engine could achieve this in a far more elegant > way by (for example) extending the number of \catcode s > to 256 (or 65536, or 4294967296, or 2&<whatever>) to > accommodate the extended semantics that Unicode encapsulates. > But in the short term, all that is necessary is to make > these characters active, and to provide definitions (compatible > with all major dialects of TeX) that implement their > semantics. They are then no more troublesome than > any of the sixteen or so currently reserved characters > when it comes to transput : that is why \unexpanded exists. > I get worried when reserved characters are not visually differentiated in an ordinary text editor from non-reserved ones.
I think it's far better if one can have packages which enable or disable these specific characters for those who want them. However, don't make me open a hex editor to see why a space is breaking or not. Best Wishes, Chris Travers -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
