Hello all, As some people will have seen, the LaTeX team have recently integrated setting of codes (\catcode, \lccode, etc.) for the entire Unicode range into the kernel when XeTeX/LuaTeX are in use. This is not a functional change for end users but does mean that the team now have some control over these important settings. Notably, the new data file we have created (unicode-letters.def) is compatible with plain TeX and works with both XeTeX and LuaTeX. We are therefore hopeful that it will provide useful not only to LaTeX users but also to those using plain-basef formats.
For the initial pass we have adopted the settings applied by unicode-letters.tex (XeTeX)/luatex-unicode-letters.tex (LuaTeX) as-is. We have constructed a new (TeX) script to generate this data from the raw Unicode data files. Most of the settings are straight-forward and shared between XeTeX and LuaTeX. For example, characters marked as Unicode as letters have \catcode 11, \lccode and \uccode are set up based on case relationships, etc. However, we would like to raise one area that may need revision. Based on the current files, we have a block to set \XeTeXcharclass, which only applies to XeTeX. The logic followed in that code is that characters in the file LineBreak.txt which have class "ID" (ideographs) not only set the \XeTeXcharclass class to 1 but also set the \catcode of the code point to 11. That leads to a difference between the two Unicode engines. My current feeling is that the data file should split this process such that the category code change applies to both XeTeX and LuaTeX, with the XeTeX-specific code separate. Does this make sense and indeed does the current assignment make sense? We are very keen to hear about any other logic changes that may be required in the data file. This is a complex area and we have at present done little other than copy the current logic. -- Joseph Wright -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex