Javier Múgica de Rivera javier at digi21.net
Tue Oct 24 20:36:50 CEST 2006

Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells escribió:
> Dear Javier, copy all --
>
> Because it is difficult for me to think in Russian (or
> even in Greek), would it be possible for you to give
> an example of your desired behaviour using (say)
> French.  I /imagine/ that what you are saying
> is that if we take é (<e-acute>) as an example of
> a character that could not normally form a part
> of a control sequence, you would like to be able
> to do the following :
>
>     \cscode \é = 1
>     \catcode \é = \active
>     \def é{\'e}
>     \def \née {born}
>
> and that this solution is preferred to
>
>     \catcode \é = \catcode \e
>     \def \née {born}
>
> because the latter does not allow the
>
>     \catcode \é = \active
>     \def é{\'e}
>
> functionality that \cscode does.  Is this correct ?
>
> ** Phil.
> --------
> because the latter has implications
>
Yes, I mean exactly that. I chose the example of Russian because in a
language that uses the Latin script, as is the case of French or
Spanish, it really isn't that annoying not to be able to use accented
leters or some particular letter of the alphabet (\~n, \c c, ...), but
if you are using another script it is very likely that you need all the
letters of your alphabet to be active, and so you are forced to use the
latin alphabet to build the names of control sequences. You said that it
is difficult for you to think in Russian. Well, neither can I, but
people using TeX in those countries **must** think in another alphabet,
and it would be really an improvement if they were able to write control
sequences using their natural script.

--
Javier A.

`