Hi Joseph,
On 27/04/2015, at 4:19 PM, Joseph Wright wrote:
> On 27/04/2015 00:22, Ross Moore wrote:
>>> But of course that doesn't address the problem for LaTeXt users until
>>> someone writes a suitable/comparable package (maybe someone did
>>> already, I didn't try to follow).
>>
>> I have cod
On 27/04/2015 07:35, Philip Taylor wrote:
> Going even further off-topic, but pursuing this one aspect of the
> thread, is there not only real one problem : the need to educate users
> to cease marking up their documents in raw (La)TeX syntax, and instead
> to express them in well-formed XML ? I
On 27/04/2015 08:43, Ross Moore wrote:
> Hi Joseph,
>
> On 27/04/2015, at 4:19 PM, Joseph Wright wrote:
>
>> On 27/04/2015 00:22, Ross Moore wrote:
But of course that doesn't address the problem for LaTeXt users until
someone writes a suitable/comparable package (maybe someone did
Joseph Wright wrote:
> On 27/04/2015 07:35, Philip Taylor wrote:
>> Going even further off-topic, but pursuing this one aspect of the
>> thread, is there not only real one problem : the need to educate users
>> to cease marking up their documents in raw (La)TeX syntax, and instead
>> to express
The biggest barrier to accessible PDFs is the nature of PDF itself. It is
essentially a preprint format that deals with glyphs rather than characters.
For complex scripts that require glyph reordering, I haven't come across a
software solution that can generate suitable PDFs.
Andrew
On Monday, 2
Hi all,
if you use Something... you
are not using XML properly. The purpose of XML is to describe the structure
of a document, not its appearance. Generally you will print the information
from the XML file in a different order or you will print just a part of it.
As the second step you will run XS
Dear Shivashankar,
I'm moving the answer to the mailing list where other people will be
able to help you better than I can (please CC him).
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 11:49 AM, Shiva Shankar wrote:
>
> Hi Mojca,
>
> My name is Shivashankar and I am from Srirangapatna, Karnataka, India. I
> wanted t
Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> if you use Something...
> you are not using XML properly. The purpose of XML is to describe the
> structure of a document, not its appearance.
Yes, the element describes the structure; attributes such as those
you quote in the example above convey hints about its intended
Dear Shivashankar,
I do not know Kannada, I even do not know other scripts, I know only
Devanagari and I think that the problems will be similar. Hyphenation in
Unicode aware engines is quite simple, if you have the patterns. TeX
hyphenates words and a word is defined as a sequence of characters w
2015-04-27 13:27 GMT+02:00 Philip Taylor :
>
>
> Zdenek Wagner wrote:
>
> > if you use Something...
> > you are not using XML properly. The purpose of XML is to describe the
> > structure of a document, not its appearance.
>
> Yes, the element describes the structure; attributes such as those
> yo
Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> Formatting advices should better be present in processing instructions.
> You can type etc.
Why do you write "better", Zdeněk ? They /can/ be expressed as
processing instructions, but that would require an augmented parser;
they can equally well be expressed as attribu
Hello Simon,
Thanks very much for this detailed information. Obviously (for now) there
is plenty there that I don’t get, terminology-wise, but no surprise. I’ll
keep this handy and work on it as I can.
I never really worked with C (I was a B programmer back in the day) and am
now working on Swift
On 27/04/2015 19:39, Philip Taylor wrote:
> As to whether "XML is a particularly good format not only here or for
> anything", all I can say is that in my experience we (humanity, that is)
> have not yet come up with anything better; LaTeX 2e, by explicitly
> permitting the conflation of form and c
2015-04-27 13:57 GMT+02:00 Philip Taylor :
>
>
> Zdenek Wagner wrote:
>
> > Formatting advices should better be present in processing instructions.
> > You can type etc.
>
> Why do you write "better", Zdeněk ? They /can/ be expressed as
> processing instructions, but that would require an augme
2015-04-27 15:00 GMT+02:00 Philip Taylor :
>
>
> Zdenek Wagner wrote:
>
> > If you want to describe the page layout in a structured way, the
> > ... markup might cause other mark up not well formed. Of course,
> > if the XML is for your own purpose, you can do anything. Even if it is
> > not sug
Zdenek Wagner wrote:
> If you want to describe the page layout in a structured way, the
> ... markup might cause other mark up not well formed. Of course,
> if the XML is for your own purpose, you can do anything. Even if it is
> not suggested by XML experts, it may be helpful. And if you like
>
> As to whether "XML is a particularly good format not only here or for
> anything", all I can say is that in my experience we (humanity, that is)
> have not yet come up with anything better; LaTeX 2e, by explicitly
> permitting the conflation of form and content, fails abysmally in this
> respec
Hi all,
On 28/04/2015, at 0:40, Apostolos Syropoulos wrote:
>>
>> As to whether "XML is a particularly good format not only here or for
>> anything", all I can say is that in my experience we (humanity, that is)
>> have not yet come up with anything better; LaTeX 2e, by explicitly
>> permitting
2015-04-27 16:40 GMT+02:00 Apostolos Syropoulos :
> Many consider that JSON will eventually replace XML.
Only if JSON gets schemes.
http://json-schema.org/ exists, but is not widely used.
Best
Martin
--
Subscriptions, Archive, and List informat
Ross Moore wrote -
> On 27/04/2015, at 10:05 AM, Douglas McKenna wrote:
>
>> Given that the number of TeX input files using ^^u is likely miniscule, and
>> the number of those that follow the ^^u or ^^U with four or six hex digits
>> is even smaller, it seemed like a worthwhile benefit vs. cost
On 27 April 2015 at 01:05, Douglas McKenna
wrote:
> Joseph Wright wrote:
>
> > \def\"{0}\expandafter\def\csname^00022\endcsname{1}
> > \ifnum\"=0 \message{tex82}\else\message{newstuff}\fi
>
> When I implemented a Unicode escape sequence extension using double-caret
> notation in the JSBox TeX
On 27 April 2015 at 23:41, Douglas McKenna
wrote:
> Ross Moore wrote -
>
> > On 27/04/2015, at 10:05 AM, Douglas McKenna wrote:
> >
> >> Given that the number of TeX input files using ^^u is likely miniscule,
> and the number of those that follow the ^^u or ^^U with four or six hex
> digits is ev
David Carlisle wrote -
> Introducing incompatible syntax for functionality shared across Unicode TeX
> extensions
> is a major headache for package authors. Please don't use this syntax!
Understood.
> That isn't at all clear, I don't see any evidence that the equivalent &#;
> notation in
Thank you sir.
Now I will start working on that.
Thanks a lot once again.
On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Zdenek Wagner
wrote:
> Dear Shivashankar,
>
> I do not know Kannada, I even do not know other scripts, I know only
> Devanagari and I think that the problems will be similar. Hyphenation
On 28/04/2015 00:48, Douglas McKenna wrote:
>> That isn't at all clear, I don't see any evidence that the equivalent
>> &#; notation in XML is getting less used. For runs of natural language
>> text then clearly using character data directly makes more sense
>> but to get specific symbols ac
25 matches
Mail list logo
