Re: Q: Unicode available/planned for (La)TeX(3)?

[Chris Rowley <C.A.Rowley@open.ac.uk>]

Berthold

> At 18:13 1999-02-25 +0000, you wrote:
> 
> >> The trouble with this is that TeX fonts can only hold 256 characters,
> >> while unicode is almost infinite.
> 
> >Worse than that is that unicode is not a font encoding (however big an
> >actual font may be one day).
> 
> Although that is how it is being used in Windows and in the next Mac OS.
> 
> Which may not please the purists, but is a real boon for people who want
> to get on with it...

Do I detect some recidivism here!?

I thought you had reassured me that all these wonderful OSs support
platform-independent portable font resources nowadays?

Thus a "unicode-encoded font" may be "in Windows" now but I hope that
we do not have to use them, whatever they may be and however easy this
may be.

To whom getting on with what are a fixed encoding and OS-embedded font
resources a boon?

In fact, I have yet to see a font encoding that is anything other than "using
16-bit numbers" but maybe "unicode" ones exist somewhere.

And I have not even started on phrases like "almost infinite" yet:-).


chris