[tex-hyphen] tl2011-pretest: loadhyph-sr-cyrl.tex still not activated by default?

[Dejan Muhamedagic]

Hi Mojca and all,

On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 12:50:10AM +0200, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> Dear Nikola and others,
> 
> With respect to your request something else just came to my mind. We
> currently have two sets of patterns:
> - Serbo-Croatian in Cyrillic script (last modified by Dejan Muhamedagić in 2008)
> - Serbian in Cyrillic script (last modified by Aleksandar Jelenak in
> 2003; based on patterns by Dejan)
> 
> Serbo-Croatian patterns (older) are supposed to cover Serbian pretty
> well (at least that is what Dejan says).

Until about twenty years ago Serbian was known as Serbocroatian.
Ditto for Bosnian and Croatian. Whoever wants to think that in the
meantime new languages came to be... well, I think that we
discussed this in the past and I really, really don't feel like
expending any more time and energy on that. I know for sure that
my patterns work well for Croatian and Bosnian too.

> I'm not sure what the reason
> for further modifications by Aleksandar was and to what extent he
> modified the patterns and Dejan didn't do much checking either. (I
> hope that Aleksandar didn't modify them manually over existing
> patgen-generated patterns.)

No idea what changed. And I'm not inclined to investigate.

> So now we have:
> - hyph-sh-latn.tex -> serbian
> - hyph-sh-cyrl.tex (equal as sh-latn, but not used anywhere)
> - hyph-sr-cyrl.tex -> serbianc
> 
> I have now merged serbian and serbianc for XeTeX and I will soon
> commit a version that merges them for LuaTeX.
> 
> However now a semi-serious problem arises. If you try to typeset some
> text in both scripts and if we use hyph-sh-latn + hyph-sr-cyrl then
> you will end up in different hyphenation.
> 
> This might have been another reason why the serbian hyphenation
> patterns were disabled. I simply have no idea which ones should be
> included and why one set of patterns would be better than the other. I
> would prefer if we would either create hyph-sr-latn (transliteration
> from hyph-sr-cyrl) or include hyph-sh-latn+hyph-sh-cyrl.

Perhaps ask users? Regarding my patterns, I believe that I've said
everything relevant in the preamble of the patterns.

I haven't been involved with TeX in such a long time and really
don't know what has been going on in the context of language
support.

> (We can prepare a longer document with hyphenation points colored, so
> that one could compare differences between hyph-sr-cyrl and
> hyph-sh-cyrl, but I'm not qualified to judge about differences and
> which ones are right or wrong.)

Unfortunately, in the next few months I won't have time to get
involved in any way.

Why not create two different packages and let the users pick
whichever they feel comfortable with (namewise, etc)?

Cheers,

Dejan

> Mojca
> 
> 
> 2011/6/1 Nikola Lečić wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Regarding these old posts:
> >
> >  http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-hyphen/2010-July/000681.html
> >  http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-hyphen/2010-July/000682.html
> >  http://tug.org/pipermail/tex-hyphen/2010-July/000683.html
> >  etc.
> >
> > After a fresh tl2011-pretest install, Serbian Cyrillic patterns are
> > still not loaded by default and the manual intervention similar to what
> > is described in the first of those mails is still necessary.
> >
> > Can someone take a look before tl2011 release?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > --
> > Nikola Lečić = Никола Лечић
> > fingerprint : FEF3 66AF C90E EDC3 D878  7CDC 956D F4AB A377 1C9B
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >