"Pedro A. Aranda" <[email protected]> writes: > I have split the commit in two (apart from minor stylistic quirks). The > first big commit is a rewrite based on comments of the head of the > section and the second is a modified version on the LaTeX markups which > were missing.
Thanks! Let me then detail the critical points I tried to address in my suggested patch and that are still missing (IMHO). > LaTeX was initially developed to handle documents written primally > in English. As long as you don't need localisation, you can use it > as-is with any language that uses the Latin character set. As a > general rule, most LaTeX classes include standard font settings that > work well in this situation. I am not sure if referring to "localization" is entirely clear to people unfamiliar with LaTeX. If someone does not get the implications of localization (names, punctuation rules), they may read this paragraph as if any Latin language will work auto-magically. > Languages using non-Latin character > sets will need font configuration, which will vary depending on the > LaTeX compiler and multi-language support package you use. This sounds like you focus on fonts only. But I think that it is also important to talk about localization. > Non-English and multi-language documents use the LaTeX packages > =babel= or =polyglossia= to localise document features like the > table of contents, dates, hyphenation, etc. Maybe "need to use"? Also, after previous sentence focuses on fonts, this reads weird. > By default, LaTeX only loads the fonts appropriate for Latin > characters. Non-Latin characters in the document are often not > rendered correctly without loading a custom font This is repeating the first paragraph. > =pdflatex= relies > on LaTeX packages you need to include using the =#+LATEX_HEADER:= > keyword Here, and elsewhere in the manual, I think that it is better to talk about export settings rather than directly asking to use keywords. That's because export settings may e configured through variables, not just via keywords. > =LATEX_MULTI_LANG= is ~nil~ by default to handle localisation > manually as described at the end of this section. This is ok, but I feel that users may be confused reading this. That's why my variant included a short explanation on why the default is nil. Also, in similar fashion, maybe also move "fontspec" description towards the end? I think that users should use babel/polyglossia if they can and only fall back to fontspec/nil when they have to. > In general, when exporting to LaTeX or PDF, we recommend > using a Unicode font set that covers the scripts you use in your > document. This will simplify the font configuration. This is repeating what we say in one of the previous paragraphs. > When =#+LATEX_MULTI_LANG= is either ~babel~ or ~polyglossia~, Org > mode will use the indicated LaTeX package to handle multi-language > support. Either should be used for non-English documents. Both > provide setting up your font configuration globally for your > document and on a per-language basis > ... > See [[#lualatex-polyglossia]] and [[#babel-fontconfig]] for more > details about how to configure fonts using ~babel~ and > ~polyglossia~. Note that ~polyglossia~ does not work with > =pdflatex= compiler. We recommend using =lualatex= or =xelatex= for > reliable non-Latin language support. Reading the first paragraph, I can see people concluding that font configuration is automatic with babel and polyglossia, while in reality fonts must be configured in addition to setting LATEX_MULTI_LANG. Finally, any reason you dropped by examples with including secondary language? I think that it needs to be explained for completeness. Because there is no way users know what to do without knowing latex. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode maintainer, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
