Jin-Hwan Cho wrote:
It's time to discuss the topic "CJK support in ConTeXt" in a more public place.
I couldn't agree more! :-)
The current version of ConTeXt supports Chinese only. But the same mechasism enables Korean too. The remaining language is Japanese. In some sense, it is possible to support Japanese in the current subfont mechanism. But several issues (e.g. Japanese kerning system as explained by Okumura) may occur.
Could you explain what these issues are? For the past couple of months I've been busy writing Japanese support for ConTeXt, based on the Chinese module. I'm not an expert in this, so I'm sure the method I used for writing Japanese support is wrong and can be improved. But for my own personal use it has already proven to be quite useable. If anyone else is interested in what I've produced so far, please let me know. I would like to know what the issues with Japanese kerning are. I do not know a lot about Japanese typography and would like to know what the limitations of code based on the Chinese module are.
My suggestion for supporting CJK characters in ConTeXt is to write a new module using e-Omega. Even though e-Omega does not produce PDF format directly, there are not much problem with DVIPDFMx.
When I first tried to use Japanese with ConTeXt, I first looked at e-Omega. The reason I gave up and tried to adapt the Chinese module was that e-Omega was unstable on my machine. Version 1.23 crashed immediately (got stuck in a loop producing [] characters). I tried 1.15 because I heard that was more stable. I got some Japanese output with this version, but when I tried creating more than a paragraph, it locked as well. But this was all a few months ago. Does anybody know if things with e-Omega have improved recently? Anyway, I would like to see a common CJK module for ConTeXt, where Chinese, Korean and Japanese are based on the same base code. It doesn't matter to me if it's implemented using subfonts or on using e-Omega, as long as it's stable and useable. Therefore, I would like to offer my help in creating CJK support. My best, Tim
Wednesday, August 27, 2003 Tim 't Hart wrote: TtH> Jin-Hwan Cho wrote:
My suggestion for supporting CJK characters in ConTeXt is to write a new module using e-Omega. Even though e-Omega does not produce PDF format directly, there are not much problem with DVIPDFMx.
TtH> When I first tried to use Japanese with ConTeXt, I first looked at TtH> e-Omega. The reason I gave up and tried to adapt the Chinese module TtH> was that e-Omega was unstable on my machine. Version 1.23 crashed TtH> immediately (got stuck in a loop producing [] characters). I tried TtH> 1.15 because I heard that was more stable. I got some Japanese TtH> output with this version, but when I tried creating more than a TtH> paragraph, it locked as well. But this was all a few months ago. TtH> Does anybody know if things with e-Omega have improved recently? I happen to be in the e-Omega task force, so I'm extremely interested in any bug report you may have on it. For the moment, let's stick to the 1.15 version, which is the official version. First of all, which TeX distribution are you using, and what does the e-Omega banner say? I know there are people using e-Omega for production use, so you might want to see if there is an upgrade available for your distribution. Secondly, do you have a test file I could give a look at? If it needs any nonstandard extra files/fonts/metrics/packages, please give me pointers to these as well. -- Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
(I hate replying to myself, but ...) Ok, since it seems that e-Omega is starting to get some "mass" interest, I'm thinking about setting up a mailing list for it. Maybe two, one for users and one for developers. Any suggestions on the listserver to use? Wednesday, August 27, 2003 Giuseppe Bilotta wrote: GB> Wednesday, August 27, 2003 Tim 't Hart wrote: TtH>> Jin-Hwan Cho wrote:
My suggestion for supporting CJK characters in ConTeXt is to write a new module using e-Omega. Even though e-Omega does not produce PDF format directly, there are not much problem with DVIPDFMx.
TtH>> When I first tried to use Japanese with ConTeXt, I first looked at TtH>> e-Omega. The reason I gave up and tried to adapt the Chinese module TtH>> was that e-Omega was unstable on my machine. Version 1.23 crashed TtH>> immediately (got stuck in a loop producing [] characters). I tried TtH>> 1.15 because I heard that was more stable. I got some Japanese TtH>> output with this version, but when I tried creating more than a TtH>> paragraph, it locked as well. But this was all a few months ago. TtH>> Does anybody know if things with e-Omega have improved recently? GB> I happen to be in the e-Omega task force, so I'm extremely GB> interested in any bug report you may have on it. For the GB> moment, let's stick to the 1.15 version, which is the official GB> version. GB> First of all, which TeX distribution are you using, and what GB> does the e-Omega banner say? I know there are people using GB> e-Omega for production use, so you might want to see if there GB> is an upgrade available for your distribution. GB> Secondly, do you have a test file I could give a look at? If it GB> needs any nonstandard extra files/fonts/metrics/packages, GB> please give me pointers to these as well.
At 12:37 27/08/2003 +0200, you wrote:
(I hate replying to myself, but ...)
Ok, since it seems that e-Omega is starting to get some "mass" interest, I'm thinking about setting up a mailing list for it. Maybe two, one for users and one for developers. Any suggestions on the listserver to use?
i can ask the ntg, since they host more lists, ok? you can mnage the list with mailmanager Hans ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE | pragma@wxs.nl Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: +31 (0)38 477 53 69 | fax: +31 (0)38 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- information: http://www.pragma-ade.com/roadmap.pdf documentation: http://www.pragma-ade.com/showcase.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, August 27, 2003 Hans Hagen wrote: HH> At 12:37 27/08/2003 +0200, you wrote:
(I hate replying to myself, but ...)
Ok, since it seems that e-Omega is starting to get some "mass" interest, I'm thinking about setting up a mailing list for it. Maybe two, one for users and one for developers. Any suggestions on the listserver to use?
HH> i can ask the ntg, since they host more lists, ok? you can mnage the list HH> with mailmanager AFAIK, the two "biggest" TeX mailing lists holders are ntg and tug; either is fine for me. Should I create two lists, or do you think that one list is enough? Given the ideas on the name change (which will be factual with the first officially "stable" release, that is the one following RC2, probably) it's probably better to use aleph in the mailing list name. So: * if we go for one list, would it be aleph@ntg.nl ? * if we go for multiple lists, what about aleph-users@ntg.nl and aleph-dev@ntg.nl ? Or maybe we just start with aleph@ntg.nl, and the create alpeh-dev@ntg.nl if there is any need to detach technical discussions from "user" discussion. Yes, let's make it this way. Is there some form to fill up to request the creation of the aleph@ntg.nl mailing list? -- Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
At 13:38 27/08/2003 +0200, you wrote:
Is there some form to fill up to request the creation of the aleph@ntg.nl mailing list?
just ask the ntg secretary Willy Egger (on this list -) Hans ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE | pragma@wxs.nl Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: +31 (0)38 477 53 69 | fax: +31 (0)38 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------- information: http://www.pragma-ade.com/roadmap.pdf documentation: http://www.pragma-ade.com/showcase.pdf -------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, August 27, 2003 Hans Hagen wrote: HH> At 13:38 27/08/2003 +0200, you wrote:
Is there some form to fill up to request the creation of the aleph@ntg.nl mailing list?
HH> just ask the ntg secretary Willy Egger (on this list -) Wow, this world is great! To Willy Egger: would it be possible to setup a mailing list at ntg.nl, named 'aleph'? -- Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
Giuseppe Bilotta wrote:
Wednesday, August 27, 2003 Hans Hagen wrote:
HH> At 12:37 27/08/2003 +0200, you wrote:
(I hate replying to myself, but ...)
Ok, since it seems that e-Omega is starting to get some "mass" interest, I'm thinking about setting up a mailing list for it. Maybe two, one for users and one for developers. Any suggestions on the listserver to use?
HH> i can ask the ntg, since they host more lists, ok? you can mnage the list HH> with mailmanager
AFAIK, the two "biggest" TeX mailing lists holders are ntg and tug; either is fine for me. Should I create two lists, or do you think that one list is enough?
FWIW, I think that one list is certainly enough. Looking at the Omega list I'm not sure there was any real benefit in having two lists; we certainly don't need to divide energies at this stage with two low-traffic lists. Now when eOmega becomes a hit, we can adjust accordingly.
Given the ideas on the name change (which will be factual with the first officially "stable" release, that is the one following RC2, probably) it's probably better to use aleph in the mailing list name. So:
BTW, since u and Hans seem to like my idea (and I'm cc'ing the others to see if they object), is it official? Are we going with Aleph? Best wishes Idris
Wednesday, August 27, 2003 Idris S Hamid wrote: ISH> FWIW, I think that one list is certainly enough. ISH> Looking at the Omega list I'm ISH> not sure there was any real benefit in having two ISH> lists; we certainly don't need ISH> to divide energies at this stage with two low-traffic lists. ISH> Now when eOmega becomes a hit, we can adjust accordingly. I fully agree.
Given the ideas on the name change (which will be factual with the first officially "stable" release, that is the one following RC2, probably) it's probably better to use aleph in the mailing list name. So:
ISH> BTW, since u and Hans seem to like my idea (and I'm ISH> cc'ing the others to see if ISH> they object), is it official? Are we going with Aleph? Yes, but only at freeze-time for the first "stable" release. That is, it'll still be e-Omega RC<something> until it seems to have been fixed and cleaned up enough. My guess is that this will take one or two Release Candidates more (RC2 at least, maybe RC3 if some other important bug pops up). Then I'll make the switch, and we'll start with $\Aleph_0$ (first stable release); we'll then go for $\Aleph_0+1$, +2, +3 for bugfix releases, and $\Aleph_1$ ($\Aleph_2$, etc) for major releases. -- Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
`Aleph' gets my vote. I think it's a great idea. ---Alan
Giuseppe Bilotta wrote:
I happen to be in the e-Omega task force, so I'm extremely interested in any bug report you may have on it. For the moment, let's stick to the 1.15 version, which is the official version.
First of all, which TeX distribution are you using, and what does the e-Omega banner say? I know there are people using e-Omega for production use, so you might want to see if there is an upgrade available for your distribution.
I first started to use e-Omega and ConTeXt with the fpTeX distribution, which had e-Omega 1.15 installed. Later I switched to W32TeX (a Japanese distribution) which had version 1.23. I just saw that a few days ago, the maintainer of W32TeX stopped including version 1.23 and he is now using 1.15--2.1-RC1. Is that the newest version? I'll give that version a try. I have good hopes for this version since I've heard you removed some bugs from it. I'm sure that everything will go fine now. Please give me some time to dig up my old e-Omega code from a dark corner of my HDD and I'll let you know how everything worked out! By the way, what is the best way to use e-Omega with ConTeXt? Is there anything I have to keep in mind? The last time I used e-Omega with ConTeXt, I made the format with 'texexec --make --alone --tex=eomega en'. And then use 'texexec --tex=eomega <filename>' to make output. Is this still the correct way? Anyway, thank you for keeping Omega alive. I always thought that Omega was a great idea, but that the lack of a stable version ruined everything. But now it appears that you have made it useable. Well, if my first tests work out great, then I'll know what I'll be doing this coming weekend! :-) My best, Tim
Wednesday, August 27, 2003 Tim 't Hart wrote:
I first started to use e-Omega and ConTeXt with the fpTeX distribution, which had e-Omega 1.15 installed. Later I switched to W32TeX (a Japanese distribution) which had version 1.23. I just saw that a few days ago, the maintainer of W32TeX stopped including version 1.23 and he is now using 1.15--2.1-RC1. Is that the newest version?
Yes, that's the most recent version. It addresses the bug that causes the previous version to bomb out each time an overfull or underfull box was met.
I'll give that version a try. I have good hopes for this version since I've heard you removed some bugs from it. I'm sure that everything will go fine now. Please give me some time to dig up my old e-Omega code from a dark corner of my HDD and I'll let you know how everything worked out!
Take your time. I really hope the latest release helps you. I'm also pleased to know that there are other, less widespread, distributions which include the program :)
By the way, what is the best way to use e-Omega with ConTeXt? Is there anything I have to keep in mind? The last time I used e-Omega with ConTeXt, I made the format with 'texexec --make --alone --tex=eomega en'. And then use 'texexec --tex=eomega <filename>' to make output. Is this still the correct way?
Yes. Of course, you can also make eomega your standard engine (in texexec.ini) and then forget about the --tex= option :)
Anyway, thank you for keeping Omega alive. I always thought that Omega was a great idea, but that the lack of a stable version ruined everything. But now it appears that you have made it useable.
That's precisely why I made it :) Omega will continue its development, maintained by John and Yannis, and I will maintain e-Omega (in the future to be renamed to Aleph) as a stable, usable alternative for those who don't need the "latest and greatest".
Well, if my first tests work out great, then I'll know what I'll be doing this coming weekend! :-)
Keep us informed! :) -- Giuseppe "Oblomov" Bilotta
participants (5)
-
Alan Hoenig -
Giuseppe Bilotta -
Hans Hagen -
Idris S Hamid -
Tim 't Hart