[tex-live] [XeTeX] Ftuture state of XeTeX in TeXLive

Petr Tomasek tomasek at etf.cuni.cz
Sun Oct 30 17:41:13 CET 2011


On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 03:29:30AM +1100, Vafa Khalighi wrote:
> Are you talking about TeX--XeT bidirectional typesetting algorithm?

Sorry that was a typo, am using a slow connection and a mutt on a server
over ssh...

> No, It has several major bugs and it is not perfect for RTL typesetting (ok
> but not perfect).

I meant XeTeX as opposed to LuaTeX...

> On Mon, Oct 31, 2011 at 3:18 AM, Petr Tomasek <tomasek at etf.cuni.cz> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 09:20:19AM -0300, George N. White III wrote:
> > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Khaled Hosny <khaledhosny at eglug.org>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 04:25:21PM +1100, Vafa Khalighi wrote:
> > > >> XeTeX font support is heaps better and  stable than what luaotfload
> > package
> > > >> offers and I guess that is why many users still like using xetex
> > instead
> > > >> luatex. I personally believe that it is a bad practice that
> > luaotfload just
> > > >> copies ConTeXt code, it should not be deeply dependent on ConTeXt
> > because Hans
> > > >> may want to try experimenting with some features today and next day
> > he gets rid
> > > >> of them just like the recent updates of luaotfload that Khaled talked
> > about it.
> > > >> I think, this is awful! What should users who used those features
> > (and need it
> > > >> heavily in their daily typesetting tasks, do?). They wake up one day
> > and
> > > >> suddenly see that yes, luaotfload does not provide the features they
> > need.
> > > >> luaotfload needs to be written from scratch independent of any
> > ConTeXt code.
> > > >
> > > > The situation is not as bad as you make it seems, what have gone is two
> > > > minor features that IMO was a mistake to provide them in the first
> > > > place, but since we are talking about a yet to be released version of
> > > > luaotfload, there might be an alternate solution at the time of
> > release.
> > > >
> > > > Writing an OpenType layout engine is not a simple task, and you can
> > > > judge from the many years it toke FOSS community to have a really good
> > > > one, HarfBuzz (the name luaotfload is misleading, font loading is about
> > > > the easiest part of luaotfload, OpenType implementation is really what
> > > > matters.) If it were for me, I'd plug HarfBuzz into luatex proper and
> > > > call it a day, but this does not align well with the "design"
> > principles
> > > > of luatex so it is unlikely to happen.
> > >
> > > If plugging harfbuzz into luatex does not require a huge effort, it could
> > > serve as bridge from xetex to luatex while a more principled design
> > > is being created.
> >
> > It would be better to have XeTeX with a stable HarfBuzz-ng support.
> >
> > Actually, I think little people need more then than what XeTTeX acctually
> > provides...
> >
> > --
> > Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek>
> > Jabber: butrus at jabbim.cz
> >
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > EA 355:001  DU DU DU DU
> > EA 355:002  TU TU TU TU
> > EA 355:003  NU NU NU NU NU NU NU
> > EA 355:004  NA NA NA NA NA
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> >
> >
> 

-- 
Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek>
Jabber: butrus at jabbim.cz

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
EA 355:001  DU DU DU DU
EA 355:002  TU TU TU TU
EA 355:003  NU NU NU NU NU NU NU
EA 355:004  NA NA NA NA NA
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




More information about the tex-live mailing list