Answer inline Enviado desde mi iPhone > El 4 oct 2025, a las 8:43, Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]> escribió: > > Pedro Andres Aranda Gutierrez <[email protected]> writes: > >>>> I would rather finish the process as is now and then think about a >>>> possible merge of both variables in a new one. Introducing it, we >>>> could talk about compromises and give the users a coarse (for all) and >>>> a fine-tune button (for the experts). >>>> >>>> WDYT? >>> >>> We can postpone this discussion if I wish to. >> ??? > > I was referring to "then think about a possible merge of both variables > in a new one". Let's leave this discussion aside and focus on other > parts of the code and docs. > >>> 1. I changed the default values to be more descriptive >> >> I personally would keep nil instead of none, since it is a well >> established standard in Emacs. > > Ok. I do not feel strongly about this particular rename. > >> Regarding the only-fonts value, if we really don't like t, we should >> use "fontspec" >> We are using the LaTeX package names already, so why not use it in >> this case too... > > Oops. Of course. In fact, I later wrote "When =#+LATEX_MULTI_LANG= is set to > ~fontspec~" > only-fonts was my initial idea but then I arrived to the same conclusion > that using package name will be better. > >>> By default, LaTeX language settings should be configured manually, by >> When this variable is nil, the LaTeX language features need to be >> configured manually, > > There is no variable, right? We are talking about +LATEX_MULTI_LANG keyword. > >>> setting up the fonts. ~babel~ and ~polyglossia~ can also set fonts >>> per-language. >> [Side comment: babel and polyglossia *use* fontspec. So this] >>> - more fine-grained control compared to ~fontspec~. >> Leave this out. > > Right. What I wanted to emphasize is that babel and polyglossia provide > a superset of features compared to fontspec. > > I agree with all other suggestions. > >> We are all in a learning process here. >> My current approach to rationalising all this is that >> 1.- We should always recommended to choose a Unicode font that covers >> all the scripts. > > +1 > >> 2.- babel/polyglossia should be used to activate typesetting rules for >> non-English documents. > > +1 > >> 3.- When a script is not included in a font, we can use fallback fonts >> w/fontspec for English docs or babel/polyglossia for non-English >> documents >> I'm using this approach with my students too and it seems to work (ie. >> they seem to understand it better this way) > > +1. Although your branch currently requires users to configure the > fallbacks manually.
I do not feel this as an “although” ;-) > > -- > 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>
