# [NTG-context] Need for \buildtextaccent, was Re: latest beta

Hans Hagen pragma at wxs.nl
Fri Jan 17 19:51:49 CET 2014

```On 1/17/2014 7:39 PM, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
>>
>> do we need a module with predefined 'missing from unicode' characters?
>
> I don't think so. We can end up with a neverending and always
> incomplete list (with theoretically unlimited number of entries),
> usable only to those few people who will care to contribute. In my
> opinion such a list is pretty much useless.
>
> Unicode already specifies that one could use "q" followed by
> "combining acute". And TeX also has support for {\'q}. Everything else
> is private use, something that users might not even use in more than a
> single document. I don't see any advantage in creating an endless
> incomplete list. In all honesty it's a lot more
> useful/readable/straightforward to use {\'q} or proper Unicode in
> these cases. And if it's not comfortable enough for the user, he can
> always provide his own private definitions.

> Thomas and Rik most probably need just the existing mechanism to work
> properly. Well, it might be slightly different for Thomas where
> Ancient Greek has a limited set of letters, but then such a list
> should better be defined in an "ancient greek predefined characters
> module".

the mechanisms works ok (i just made it a bit more efficient, not that
it matters much)

> Just my 2 cents.

it depends on to what extend such characters play a different role too
and need to travel around (but as there never was any demand for that i
assume 2 cents will do)

Hans

-----------------------------------------------------------------