[tex-hyphen] hyphenation different in xelatex?

[Arthur Reutenauer]

On Fri, Sep 04, 2015 at 11:39:03AM +0200, Mojca Miklavec wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 11:17 AM, Claudio Beccari wrote:
>> Isn't much simpler to filter the pattern file for utf-8 aware
>> programs through the utf8 to t1 encoding and have the same patterns (coded
>> in a different way) for all engines?
>
> No, it is not simpler. We would have to do extra work. Not that extra
> work is a problem, but we would have to maintain five German pattern
> files instead of three with super weird language code
> (de-1901-x-legacytex?), and why would anyone working with XeTeX/LuaTeX
> even want outdated/inferior patterns anyway?
>
> Not touching the old German patterns was a somewhat deliberate
> decision, hoping that we'll be able to switch to the new ones some
> time soon.

  I think you misunderstood Claudio, he obviously means to do what
you're saying in your second paragraph, i. e.

	\ifx\secondarg\empty
	    % Unicode-aware engine (such as XeTeX or LuaTeX) only sees a single (2-byte) argument
	    \message{UTF-8 German hyphenation patterns (traditional orthography)}
	    \input hyph-de-1901.tex
	\else
	    % 8-bit engine (such as TeX or pdfTeX)
	    \message{EC German hyphenation patterns (traditional orthography)}
	    \input conv-utf8-ec.tex
	    \input hyph-de-1901.tex
	\fi

like we do for every other language.

  I'm not going to comment on the content of the discussion nor take
sides, as I doubt anything new can be said on the issue and we're just
going in circles at this point (the simple fact that two people who
basically agree with each other are arguing is a perfect example of
that).  What we need in my opinion is for people who feel they're
qualified to make a clear decision, to implement it, and to review it
regularly in the future to make sure it continues to serve users best.
It's the lack of decisiveness that's harming the community the most, not
choosing one way or the other.

	Best,

		Arthur