[tex-live] clash between babel (french), hyperref and \cite on keys with a colon character
zdenek.wagner at gmail.com
Mon Sep 22 22:07:42 CEST 2014
2014-09-22 20:36 GMT+02:00 Robin Fairbairns <Robin.Fairbairns at cl.cam.ac.uk>:
> Vincent Lefevre <vincent at vinc17.net> wrote:
>> On 2014-09-22 16:34:21 +0100, Robin Fairbairns wrote:
>> > Vincent Lefevre <vincent at vinc17.net> wrote:
>> > > On 2014-09-22 15:55:24 +0100, Robin Fairbairns wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > it is a feature because it's insoluble when using tex or latex.
>> > >
>> > > Why insoluble? What's the problem with redefining \cite?
>> > it's trivial, of course. except that there are quite a few definitions
>> > of \cite, and you need to know which properties are needed by each use
>> > of each version.
>> OK, I didn't think about that. There's still the question whether
>> it could be an hyperref bug (see jfbu's answer).
> indeed. they do still pop up. it's a rather old package (i think its
> first version -- pre-heiko -- appeared in the 1990s).
>> > and indeed, what's wrong with switching off active status before use of
>> > a punctuation mark in a macro?
>> > imo, the only _real_ solution involves switching to a "cleverer"
>> > tex-like processor.
>> I've just tried lualatex (to compare), but the PDF bookmarks are
>> displayed as if ISO-8859-1 were used, while the source is in UTF-8.
> i've never done anything non-trivial with luatex. getting the encodings
> wrong, like that, sounds like something missing somewhere. i would poke
> around with heiko's documentation (or possibly his huge collection of
> small packages in macros/latex/contrib/oberdiek on ctan).
The problem lies in Adobe. The PDF documentation says that the
bookmarks have AdobeStandardEncoding. In newer versions (nowaday's
versions fall into this category) you can override this default by
starting a unicode string with a BOM. The only thing which is needed
is to supply "unicode" as a hyperref option and it will create unicode
bookmarks with BOM.
>> And xelatex seems fine.
> simpler platform, of course. (and older, bedded in for some time.)
Here the mystery lies in xdvipdfmx. It uses unicode only and adds BOM
automatically without any help from the hyperref package. I hope I
remember it well.
>> Now, perhaps the use of pdflatex should be discouraged in a visible
> i wouldn't do that on the basis of one positive test.
> the requirement for utf-8 is going to frighten a lot of people, of
> course. (i don't use utf-8 in ordinary work, since english is _soo_
> bare-bones simple. i could work -- with some difficulty -- in french,
> but no other language unless you count american.)
Even Indic languages and many others are possible with pdf(la)tex but
nowadays nobody designs fonts for old-style TeX. On the contrary,
OpenType fonts are available, both free and commercial, because they
can be used by many programs. It is thus a natural step to support
these fonts in new TeX engines.
More information about the tex-live