As I understand it, by default luatex accepts its input in UTF8. However, the manual if \pdfoutput=1, fonts are limited to 256 glyphs. What is the expected idiom for massaging the input so that non-ASCII UTF8 symbols can be displayed sensibly? Should I be putting a hook into the reader callback? Or is there intended to be a more specific mechanism in the future? Put another way, I have a LaTeX document that in conjunction with the inputenc package and pdftex-1.40.x-beta handles the occurrences of UTF8 in my document by replacing them with macros I've defined. However, I don't expect inputenc works with lua{la}tex, and I'm trying to decide how to best port my document over. Thanks for any suggestions! -- [Geoff Washburn|geoffw@cis.upenn.edu|http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~geoffw/]
Geoffrey Alan Washburn wrote:
As I understand it, by default luatex accepts its input in UTF8. However, the manual if \pdfoutput=1, fonts are limited to 256 glyphs. What is the expected idiom for massaging the input so that non-ASCII UTF8 symbols can be displayed sensibly? Should I be putting a hook into the reader callback? Or is there intended to be a more specific mechanism in the future? Put another way, I have a LaTeX document that in conjunction with the inputenc package and pdftex-1.40.x-beta handles the occurrences of UTF8 in my document by replacing them with macros I've defined. However, I don't expect inputenc works with lua{la}tex, and I'm trying to decide how to best port my document over.
you can try to use active characters but better is to wait till open type support (and more advanced type 1 support) is available; the first usabla beta's are scheduled around eurotex (may 2007); keep in mind that luatex is *not* stable, under active development, and that we take the freedome to change every aspect of it; we plan to have stable versions available end-of-2007; implementing macro based solutions and expecting them to work in the future is kind of dangerous and esp upcoming versions will probably be broken in many aspects (esp when tex's font mechanisms are being replaced / extended) so, porting documents is not a good idea right now; also, till we have complete open type support and more, luatex is hardly a replacement for pdftex; if you are in a hurry with utf and latex is unsufficient, you may want to look into xetex Hans ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl -----------------------------------------------------------------
you can try to use active characters but better is to wait till open type support (and more advanced type 1 support) is available; the first usabla beta's are scheduled around eurotex (may 2007); keep in mind that luatex is *not* stable, under active development, and that we take the freedome to change every aspect of it; we plan to have stable versions available end-of-2007; implementing macro based solutions and expecting them to work in the future is kind of dangerous and esp upcoming versions will probably be broken in many aspects (esp when tex's font mechanisms are being replaced / extended) so, porting documents is not a good idea right now; also, till we have complete open type support and more, luatex is hardly a replacement for pdftex; if you are in a hurry with utf and latex is unsufficient, you may want to look into xetex Actually, as far as Unicode/UTF8 support goes pdftex and LaTeX are sufficient. The issue is more that they are lacking in the
Hans Hagen wrote: programmability space. However, given the May 2007 estimate on a beta release, it may still be better for me to just get by the with existing hacks around the problem. Thanks for the information! -- [Geoff Washburn|geoffw@cis.upenn.edu|http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~geoffw/]
participants (2)
-
Geoffrey Alan Washburn -
Hans Hagen