Am 25.12.2008 um 16:49 schrieb Mojca Miklavec:
I'm still curious: what's the difference between cm-super and cm-unicode (apart from size and different format)?
cm-super: type1 cm-unicode: opentype Their main purpose is to create free good quality fonts for use in X applications supporting many languages. (cm unicode [1])
One thing that I would like to see preserved within minimals is "full compatibility" in the sense that what works in minimals should also work on TeX Live and MikTeX. Maybe not today because TeX Live is outdated and MikTeX dropped support for ConTeXt for some unpredictable amount of time, but a year later or if someone updates ConTeXt in TeX Live.)
In the old ConTeXt distribution there were lots of files that were not present anywhere else, so what worked in the ConTeXt distribution did not work in TeX Live or Minimals which is a pity. Such incompatibilities should be solved in other ways.
So I would prefer to add packages that are on CTAN (or are planned to go there) and have some potential to become part of MikTeX and TeX Live. Is anyone working on cm-unicode being added to CTAN (preferrably in TDS-compliant way)? Does that make sense?
I can make a package and put it on CTAN but the question is, do you want them in the minimals, do we need type1 files and if yes for which encodings, only t2a or more. [1] http://canopus.iacp.dvo.ru/%7Epanov/cm-unicode/ Wolfgang