<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18975">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">Hmm. I would say that straightforward
application of the old rules yields what still seems to me to be the best (and
fairly obvious) set of choices:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">bio-gra-phy</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">bio-gra-phi-cal</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">Viz.: break at clear etymological
divisions and otherwise take over consonants (treating ph as consonant, of
course). (With a few more items such as -ing, -able regarded as separable,
and a good deal of uncertainty over 'r' in particular: probably
</FONT><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">char-ac-ter rather than cha-rac-ter, though
of course Greek would have no qualms about breaking after the first vowel [while
in fact taking over 'kt'!].</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">Many more criteria and parameters seem to
have been fed into the mix in the meantime, but I have never been able to
appreciate the advantages which the authors of the changes presumably thought
they were bringing about with their innovations.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">John</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=wujastyk@gmail.com href="mailto:wujastyk@gmail.com">Dominik
Wujastyk</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=xetex@tug.org
href="mailto:xetex@tug.org">Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X and other
platforms</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> 24 October 2010 19:16</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [XeTeX] (Xe)LaTeX output in
a non-(Xe)LaTeX scholarly community</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>Here's what TeX does with "biography" and "biographical" (using
\showhyphens). The first item is the result with British English
hyphenation patterns loaded. The second is with the USA patterns loaded
(ugh!).<BR>
<OL>
<LI>Underfull \hbox (badness 10000) in paragraph at lines 6--6<BR>[]
\OT1/cmr/m/n/10 bio-graphy bio-graph-ical
<LI>Underfull \hbox (badness 10000) in paragraph at lines 9--9<BR>[]
\OT1/cmr/m/n/10 bi-og-ra-phy bi-o-graph-i-cal<BR></LI></OL>The Oxford Colour
Spelling Dictionary is not following the hyphenation points of the words on
the 1996 tape we were sent.<BR><BR>Dominik<BR><BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On 24 October 2010 09:45, John Was <SPAN dir=ltr><<A
href="mailto:john.was@ntlworld.com">john.was@ntlworld.com</A>></SPAN>
wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV bgcolor="#ffffff">
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">I'm afraid the hyphenation rot had set in
well before 1996. Any publisher that can list bio|graph|ic|al and
biog|raphy in adjacent entries to its published dictionary of hyphenation
points (The Oxford Colour Spelling Dictionary) clearly needs to be treated
with caution on such matters! (The second two in 'biographical'
are marked as less preferable, and I used to dream of a system which would
allow ranking of hyphenation points, though it's a pretty immense task; the
solitary one in biography' is surely unacceptable.)</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS"></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">The old conventions as delineated in the
latest editions of Hart were much safer, allowing much less less leeway for
inflexional breaks and for the 'feel' of how words are pronounced nowadays
(or however they would like to express it) and sticking to a finite number
of quite easily grasped rules that had essentially been in place since the
inception of type and (in view of the prevalence of classical learning at
that time) are recognizable adaptations of Latin/Greek rules (essentially:
take over a single consonant, split a group of consonants, though it
isn't that straightforward of course).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS"></FONT> </DIV><FONT color=#888888>
<DIV><FONT face="Arial Unicode MS">John</FONT></DIV></FONT>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(0,0,0) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=im>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: rgb(228,228,228)"><B>From:</B>
<A title=wujastyk@gmail.com href="mailto:wujastyk@gmail.com"
target=_blank>Dominik Wujastyk</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=xetex@tug.org
href="mailto:xetex@tug.org" target=_blank>Unicode-based TeX for Mac OS X
and other platforms</A> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=im>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> 23 October 2010 17:51</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [XeTeX] (Xe)LaTeX output
in a non-(Xe)LaTeX scholarly community</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=h5>On 23 October 2010 16:20, John Was <SPAN dir=ltr><<A
href="mailto:john.was@ntlworld.com"
target=_blank>john.was@ntlworld.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR><BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>[...]<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>Getting back to TeX-related matters, the hyphenation
patterns available in XeTeX (even to 'plain' users like myself) are an
enormous help, even if I disagree with the English at frequent points
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>[...]<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV> </DIV>Phil Taylor, Graham Toal, and I were involved in making
the British English hyphenation patterns for TeX. They were based on
a really good tape of UK-English-hyphenated words supplied to me by OUP
themselves in 1996 (with full permissions to release the results to the
TeX community). When you say you disagree with the English break
points quite often, are you using the US or the UK patterns? They're
very, very different. <BR><BR>It's hard to get good public info on
British English hyphenation. American dictionaries routinely include
hyphenation points, but British one's routinely don't. The OUP tape was a
godsend.<BR><BR>Dominik<BR><BR></DIV></DIV>
<P></P>
<HR>
<DIV class=im>
<P></P><BR><BR>--------------------------------------------------<BR>Subscriptions,
Archive, and List information, etc.:<BR> <A
href="http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex"
target=_blank>http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex</A><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR><BR><BR>--------------------------------------------------<BR>Subscriptions,
Archive, and List information, etc.:<BR> <A
href="http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex"
target=_blank>http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex</A><BR><BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P><BR><BR>--------------------------------------------------<BR>Subscriptions,
Archive, and List information, etc.:<BR>
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>