[XeTeX] Should xelatex have its own kernel? (was: "Conflict between xunicode and fontspec?")

[Mojca Miklavec]

On Feb 7, 2008 9:28 AM, François Charette wrote:
>
> I agree here. Following the same thread, I was boldly thinking whether
> we might consider the possibility of a format that is specific to
> xelatex; that is, instead of creating xelatex.fmt directly from
> latex.ltx, that we rename it to xelatex.ltx and make all the changes and
> additions we thing should be available by default to xelatex users in
> our own kernel, with the objective of enhancing it for our purposes,
> without of course breaking compatibility with standard LaTeX. This would
> consist in:
>
> * removing obsolete code in the kernel and patching it with fixltx2e.sty,
>
> * including the code from etex.sty and probably part of the code from
> xltxtra.sty,
>
> * and adding other enhancements as well (see further below).
>
> This is a rather spontaneous idea, and I have not thought out its
> practical implications, but I would be interested to know what you think.

I'm not using XeLaTeX, but if I was on your (in the sense of a broader
community, not you personally) place, I would do exactly that.

If the ones responsible for "pure LaTeX" format (no idea who that
would be) are not willing to update the format to support XeTeX
better, I see no harm in creating a patched LaTeX version that
possibly includes OpenType LM as well as fontspec and other sugars in
the format already. I don't know if a general agreement of what should
go in and what not can be met (I don't know much about (Xe)LaTeX), but
the idea doesn't sound bad at all.

Jonathan has patched the hyphenation patterns already, so why not
patching the format itself for the next TeX Live?

Mojca