Decide between Polyglossia and Babel for LuaLaTeX in 2019 The Next CEO of Stack OverflowPolyglossia vs BabelDeclareLanguageMappingSuffix, inheritance, and polyglossia in biblatexHow is the support for polyglossia in LuaLaTeX?Decide between Polyglossia and Babel for XeLaTeX in 2019Polyglossia vs BabelProblem between unicode-math and babel option frenchb in LuaLaTeXContributing to Babel or Polyglossia language supportIs it a bug? (LuaLaTeX AND [russian](Polyglossia OR Babel) AND Cleveref) => ERRORHow is the support for polyglossia in LuaLaTeX?Future of babel and polyglossia[Babel/Polyglossia]: wrong hyphenation?Babel or Polyglossia with LuaLatex?polyglossia, Korean and LuaLaTeXHyphenation with Babel and Polyglossia
How can I separate the number from the unit in argument?
Calculating discount not working
Find the majority element, which appears more than half the time
How to coordinate airplane tickets?
Can Sri Krishna be called 'a person'?
Small nick on power cord from an electric alarm clock, and copper wiring exposed but intact
My ex-girlfriend uses my Apple ID to login to her iPad, do I have to give her my Apple ID password to reset it?
Do I need to write [sic] when including a quotation with a number less than 10 that isn't written out?
Is a distribution that is normal, but highly skewed, considered Gaussian?
Finitely generated matrix groups whose eigenvalues are all algebraic
What is a typical Mizrachi Seder like?
That's an odd coin - I wonder why
Strange use of "whether ... than ..." in official text
How to find if SQL server backup is encrypted with TDE without restoring the backup
What steps are necessary to read a Modern SSD in Medieval Europe?
Ising model simulation
Could you use a laser beam as a modulated carrier wave for radio signal?
A hang glider, sudden unexpected lift to 25,000 feet altitude, what could do this?
Is a linearly independent set whose span is dense a Schauder basis?
Read/write a pipe-delimited file line by line with some simple text manipulation
How to compactly explain secondary and tertiary characters without resorting to stereotypes?
Early programmable calculators with RS-232
How can the PCs determine if an item is a phylactery?
Oldie but Goldie
Decide between Polyglossia and Babel for LuaLaTeX in 2019
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowPolyglossia vs BabelDeclareLanguageMappingSuffix, inheritance, and polyglossia in biblatexHow is the support for polyglossia in LuaLaTeX?Decide between Polyglossia and Babel for XeLaTeX in 2019Polyglossia vs BabelProblem between unicode-math and babel option frenchb in LuaLaTeXContributing to Babel or Polyglossia language supportIs it a bug? (LuaLaTeX AND [russian](Polyglossia OR Babel) AND Cleveref) => ERRORHow is the support for polyglossia in LuaLaTeX?Future of babel and polyglossia[Babel/Polyglossia]: wrong hyphenation?Babel or Polyglossia with LuaLatex?polyglossia, Korean and LuaLaTeXHyphenation with Babel and Polyglossia
Which are the key questions one has to ask to decide between Polyglossia and Babel for a LuaLaTeX project in 2019?
There has been a similar, more general question in 2012, but the packages have changed a lot in the meantime. Hence I open a new, more specific question.
Can we reduce it to a check list like
Use package A, if you need
- utf-8 characters
- right to left support
Use package B, if you need
- package foo, because A breaks foo
luatex babel polyglossia incompatibility comparison
|
show 6 more comments
Which are the key questions one has to ask to decide between Polyglossia and Babel for a LuaLaTeX project in 2019?
There has been a similar, more general question in 2012, but the packages have changed a lot in the meantime. Hence I open a new, more specific question.
Can we reduce it to a check list like
Use package A, if you need
- utf-8 characters
- right to left support
Use package B, if you need
- package foo, because A breaks foo
luatex babel polyglossia incompatibility comparison
1
Would you be OK with expanding the question to XeLaTeX as well, so this question is truly a more modern version of the other one or do you think it would be more useful to have a separate XeLaTeX question (I don't know if there are relevant differences between the two, but I thinkbabel
's new RTL support works better for LuaLaTeX than XeLaTeX, though I could be completely wrong.)
– moewe
yesterday
1
For packages likecsquotes
andbiblatex
, but also some others like ctan.org/pkg/tracklang and packages using itpolyglossia
has the disadvantage that it does not expose language variants in a way that can be picked up easily by those packages. That means that there are some rough edges with dialect forms (english
,british
,american
;ngerman
,german
,naustrian
, ...). See for example tex.stackexchange.com/q/432347/35864. Most of those packages won't exactly break withpolyglossia
, but they work better/smoother withbabel
.
– moewe
yesterday
2
I don't think there is any reason to usepolyglossia
overbabel
forlualatex
.
– David Purton
yesterday
1
@JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.
– David Carlisle
yesterday
2
@Davislor It's even worse --defaultfontfeatures
is ignored altogether. This is a bug, already fixed on the repository. I'll upload the new version to CTAN very likely tomorrow.
– Javier Bezos
yesterday
|
show 6 more comments
Which are the key questions one has to ask to decide between Polyglossia and Babel for a LuaLaTeX project in 2019?
There has been a similar, more general question in 2012, but the packages have changed a lot in the meantime. Hence I open a new, more specific question.
Can we reduce it to a check list like
Use package A, if you need
- utf-8 characters
- right to left support
Use package B, if you need
- package foo, because A breaks foo
luatex babel polyglossia incompatibility comparison
Which are the key questions one has to ask to decide between Polyglossia and Babel for a LuaLaTeX project in 2019?
There has been a similar, more general question in 2012, but the packages have changed a lot in the meantime. Hence I open a new, more specific question.
Can we reduce it to a check list like
Use package A, if you need
- utf-8 characters
- right to left support
Use package B, if you need
- package foo, because A breaks foo
luatex babel polyglossia incompatibility comparison
luatex babel polyglossia incompatibility comparison
asked yesterday
Jonas SteinJonas Stein
3,26542744
3,26542744
1
Would you be OK with expanding the question to XeLaTeX as well, so this question is truly a more modern version of the other one or do you think it would be more useful to have a separate XeLaTeX question (I don't know if there are relevant differences between the two, but I thinkbabel
's new RTL support works better for LuaLaTeX than XeLaTeX, though I could be completely wrong.)
– moewe
yesterday
1
For packages likecsquotes
andbiblatex
, but also some others like ctan.org/pkg/tracklang and packages using itpolyglossia
has the disadvantage that it does not expose language variants in a way that can be picked up easily by those packages. That means that there are some rough edges with dialect forms (english
,british
,american
;ngerman
,german
,naustrian
, ...). See for example tex.stackexchange.com/q/432347/35864. Most of those packages won't exactly break withpolyglossia
, but they work better/smoother withbabel
.
– moewe
yesterday
2
I don't think there is any reason to usepolyglossia
overbabel
forlualatex
.
– David Purton
yesterday
1
@JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.
– David Carlisle
yesterday
2
@Davislor It's even worse --defaultfontfeatures
is ignored altogether. This is a bug, already fixed on the repository. I'll upload the new version to CTAN very likely tomorrow.
– Javier Bezos
yesterday
|
show 6 more comments
1
Would you be OK with expanding the question to XeLaTeX as well, so this question is truly a more modern version of the other one or do you think it would be more useful to have a separate XeLaTeX question (I don't know if there are relevant differences between the two, but I thinkbabel
's new RTL support works better for LuaLaTeX than XeLaTeX, though I could be completely wrong.)
– moewe
yesterday
1
For packages likecsquotes
andbiblatex
, but also some others like ctan.org/pkg/tracklang and packages using itpolyglossia
has the disadvantage that it does not expose language variants in a way that can be picked up easily by those packages. That means that there are some rough edges with dialect forms (english
,british
,american
;ngerman
,german
,naustrian
, ...). See for example tex.stackexchange.com/q/432347/35864. Most of those packages won't exactly break withpolyglossia
, but they work better/smoother withbabel
.
– moewe
yesterday
2
I don't think there is any reason to usepolyglossia
overbabel
forlualatex
.
– David Purton
yesterday
1
@JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.
– David Carlisle
yesterday
2
@Davislor It's even worse --defaultfontfeatures
is ignored altogether. This is a bug, already fixed on the repository. I'll upload the new version to CTAN very likely tomorrow.
– Javier Bezos
yesterday
1
1
Would you be OK with expanding the question to XeLaTeX as well, so this question is truly a more modern version of the other one or do you think it would be more useful to have a separate XeLaTeX question (I don't know if there are relevant differences between the two, but I think
babel
's new RTL support works better for LuaLaTeX than XeLaTeX, though I could be completely wrong.)– moewe
yesterday
Would you be OK with expanding the question to XeLaTeX as well, so this question is truly a more modern version of the other one or do you think it would be more useful to have a separate XeLaTeX question (I don't know if there are relevant differences between the two, but I think
babel
's new RTL support works better for LuaLaTeX than XeLaTeX, though I could be completely wrong.)– moewe
yesterday
1
1
For packages like
csquotes
and biblatex
, but also some others like ctan.org/pkg/tracklang and packages using it polyglossia
has the disadvantage that it does not expose language variants in a way that can be picked up easily by those packages. That means that there are some rough edges with dialect forms (english
, british
, american
; ngerman
, german
, naustrian
, ...). See for example tex.stackexchange.com/q/432347/35864. Most of those packages won't exactly break with polyglossia
, but they work better/smoother with babel
.– moewe
yesterday
For packages like
csquotes
and biblatex
, but also some others like ctan.org/pkg/tracklang and packages using it polyglossia
has the disadvantage that it does not expose language variants in a way that can be picked up easily by those packages. That means that there are some rough edges with dialect forms (english
, british
, american
; ngerman
, german
, naustrian
, ...). See for example tex.stackexchange.com/q/432347/35864. Most of those packages won't exactly break with polyglossia
, but they work better/smoother with babel
.– moewe
yesterday
2
2
I don't think there is any reason to use
polyglossia
over babel
for lualatex
.– David Purton
yesterday
I don't think there is any reason to use
polyglossia
over babel
for lualatex
.– David Purton
yesterday
1
1
@JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.
– David Carlisle
yesterday
@JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.
– David Carlisle
yesterday
2
2
@Davislor It's even worse --
defaultfontfeatures
is ignored altogether. This is a bug, already fixed on the repository. I'll upload the new version to CTAN very likely tomorrow.– Javier Bezos
yesterday
@Davislor It's even worse --
defaultfontfeatures
is ignored altogether. This is a bug, already fixed on the repository. I'll upload the new version to CTAN very likely tomorrow.– Javier Bezos
yesterday
|
show 6 more comments
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
Here's some reasons why I prefer babel
over polyglossia
for lualatex
.
babel
's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, butpoyglossia
is only getting a few minor updates.babel
's RTL and BiDi support is really nice forlualatex
now. Butpolyglossia
only supports RTL text withxelatex
.babel
's newini
system for setting up languages is very neat and I think will improve rapidly. It also makes it easy to add new languages and update existing languages.babel
's font support is easier to use to set up standard families for different languages, whereaspolyglossia
basically just uses standardfontspec
calls.- For standard European languages
babel
's support is very mature. polyglossia
's language variants do not work well withbiblatex
orcsquotes
.
You might choose polyglossia
if you want to write a RTL only document with xelatex
, as the bidi
package has been around for a long time. But if the main document language is LTR, I wouldn't do this now as babel
and lualatex
is better and involves less hacks and workarounds. You might also choose to use polyglossia
with xelatex
if you need certain complex scripts that lualatex
still does not handle well. But none of these reasons justify choosing polyglossia
over babel
if you have already decided to use lualatex
.
add a comment |
There are 79 language definition files (gloss-XX) in the polyglossia
folder. For a thorough comparision you would have to compare for every language how good the gloss-file is, if it works with lualatex, if babel
provide definitions for this language too and how good it works with lualatex. And naturally you also need to check if babel knows language which polyglossia
doesn't have. That's a lot work which I won't do (but it is known that the french module is clearly better in babel).
For all language relevant to me I prefer today babel over polyglossia. Even more if I use lualatex as babel has more lualatex specific code (polyglossia has been developed with xelatex in mind). babel
is better maintained and its interface for other packages which need language support (biblatex
) is better.
add a comment |
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "85"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f482396%2fdecide-between-polyglossia-and-babel-for-lualatex-in-2019%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Here's some reasons why I prefer babel
over polyglossia
for lualatex
.
babel
's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, butpoyglossia
is only getting a few minor updates.babel
's RTL and BiDi support is really nice forlualatex
now. Butpolyglossia
only supports RTL text withxelatex
.babel
's newini
system for setting up languages is very neat and I think will improve rapidly. It also makes it easy to add new languages and update existing languages.babel
's font support is easier to use to set up standard families for different languages, whereaspolyglossia
basically just uses standardfontspec
calls.- For standard European languages
babel
's support is very mature. polyglossia
's language variants do not work well withbiblatex
orcsquotes
.
You might choose polyglossia
if you want to write a RTL only document with xelatex
, as the bidi
package has been around for a long time. But if the main document language is LTR, I wouldn't do this now as babel
and lualatex
is better and involves less hacks and workarounds. You might also choose to use polyglossia
with xelatex
if you need certain complex scripts that lualatex
still does not handle well. But none of these reasons justify choosing polyglossia
over babel
if you have already decided to use lualatex
.
add a comment |
Here's some reasons why I prefer babel
over polyglossia
for lualatex
.
babel
's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, butpoyglossia
is only getting a few minor updates.babel
's RTL and BiDi support is really nice forlualatex
now. Butpolyglossia
only supports RTL text withxelatex
.babel
's newini
system for setting up languages is very neat and I think will improve rapidly. It also makes it easy to add new languages and update existing languages.babel
's font support is easier to use to set up standard families for different languages, whereaspolyglossia
basically just uses standardfontspec
calls.- For standard European languages
babel
's support is very mature. polyglossia
's language variants do not work well withbiblatex
orcsquotes
.
You might choose polyglossia
if you want to write a RTL only document with xelatex
, as the bidi
package has been around for a long time. But if the main document language is LTR, I wouldn't do this now as babel
and lualatex
is better and involves less hacks and workarounds. You might also choose to use polyglossia
with xelatex
if you need certain complex scripts that lualatex
still does not handle well. But none of these reasons justify choosing polyglossia
over babel
if you have already decided to use lualatex
.
add a comment |
Here's some reasons why I prefer babel
over polyglossia
for lualatex
.
babel
's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, butpoyglossia
is only getting a few minor updates.babel
's RTL and BiDi support is really nice forlualatex
now. Butpolyglossia
only supports RTL text withxelatex
.babel
's newini
system for setting up languages is very neat and I think will improve rapidly. It also makes it easy to add new languages and update existing languages.babel
's font support is easier to use to set up standard families for different languages, whereaspolyglossia
basically just uses standardfontspec
calls.- For standard European languages
babel
's support is very mature. polyglossia
's language variants do not work well withbiblatex
orcsquotes
.
You might choose polyglossia
if you want to write a RTL only document with xelatex
, as the bidi
package has been around for a long time. But if the main document language is LTR, I wouldn't do this now as babel
and lualatex
is better and involves less hacks and workarounds. You might also choose to use polyglossia
with xelatex
if you need certain complex scripts that lualatex
still does not handle well. But none of these reasons justify choosing polyglossia
over babel
if you have already decided to use lualatex
.
Here's some reasons why I prefer babel
over polyglossia
for lualatex
.
babel
's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, butpoyglossia
is only getting a few minor updates.babel
's RTL and BiDi support is really nice forlualatex
now. Butpolyglossia
only supports RTL text withxelatex
.babel
's newini
system for setting up languages is very neat and I think will improve rapidly. It also makes it easy to add new languages and update existing languages.babel
's font support is easier to use to set up standard families for different languages, whereaspolyglossia
basically just uses standardfontspec
calls.- For standard European languages
babel
's support is very mature. polyglossia
's language variants do not work well withbiblatex
orcsquotes
.
You might choose polyglossia
if you want to write a RTL only document with xelatex
, as the bidi
package has been around for a long time. But if the main document language is LTR, I wouldn't do this now as babel
and lualatex
is better and involves less hacks and workarounds. You might also choose to use polyglossia
with xelatex
if you need certain complex scripts that lualatex
still does not handle well. But none of these reasons justify choosing polyglossia
over babel
if you have already decided to use lualatex
.
answered yesterday
David PurtonDavid Purton
11.1k2941
11.1k2941
add a comment |
add a comment |
There are 79 language definition files (gloss-XX) in the polyglossia
folder. For a thorough comparision you would have to compare for every language how good the gloss-file is, if it works with lualatex, if babel
provide definitions for this language too and how good it works with lualatex. And naturally you also need to check if babel knows language which polyglossia
doesn't have. That's a lot work which I won't do (but it is known that the french module is clearly better in babel).
For all language relevant to me I prefer today babel over polyglossia. Even more if I use lualatex as babel has more lualatex specific code (polyglossia has been developed with xelatex in mind). babel
is better maintained and its interface for other packages which need language support (biblatex
) is better.
add a comment |
There are 79 language definition files (gloss-XX) in the polyglossia
folder. For a thorough comparision you would have to compare for every language how good the gloss-file is, if it works with lualatex, if babel
provide definitions for this language too and how good it works with lualatex. And naturally you also need to check if babel knows language which polyglossia
doesn't have. That's a lot work which I won't do (but it is known that the french module is clearly better in babel).
For all language relevant to me I prefer today babel over polyglossia. Even more if I use lualatex as babel has more lualatex specific code (polyglossia has been developed with xelatex in mind). babel
is better maintained and its interface for other packages which need language support (biblatex
) is better.
add a comment |
There are 79 language definition files (gloss-XX) in the polyglossia
folder. For a thorough comparision you would have to compare for every language how good the gloss-file is, if it works with lualatex, if babel
provide definitions for this language too and how good it works with lualatex. And naturally you also need to check if babel knows language which polyglossia
doesn't have. That's a lot work which I won't do (but it is known that the french module is clearly better in babel).
For all language relevant to me I prefer today babel over polyglossia. Even more if I use lualatex as babel has more lualatex specific code (polyglossia has been developed with xelatex in mind). babel
is better maintained and its interface for other packages which need language support (biblatex
) is better.
There are 79 language definition files (gloss-XX) in the polyglossia
folder. For a thorough comparision you would have to compare for every language how good the gloss-file is, if it works with lualatex, if babel
provide definitions for this language too and how good it works with lualatex. And naturally you also need to check if babel knows language which polyglossia
doesn't have. That's a lot work which I won't do (but it is known that the french module is clearly better in babel).
For all language relevant to me I prefer today babel over polyglossia. Even more if I use lualatex as babel has more lualatex specific code (polyglossia has been developed with xelatex in mind). babel
is better maintained and its interface for other packages which need language support (biblatex
) is better.
answered yesterday
Ulrike FischerUlrike Fischer
197k8304690
197k8304690
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f482396%2fdecide-between-polyglossia-and-babel-for-lualatex-in-2019%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Would you be OK with expanding the question to XeLaTeX as well, so this question is truly a more modern version of the other one or do you think it would be more useful to have a separate XeLaTeX question (I don't know if there are relevant differences between the two, but I think
babel
's new RTL support works better for LuaLaTeX than XeLaTeX, though I could be completely wrong.)– moewe
yesterday
1
For packages like
csquotes
andbiblatex
, but also some others like ctan.org/pkg/tracklang and packages using itpolyglossia
has the disadvantage that it does not expose language variants in a way that can be picked up easily by those packages. That means that there are some rough edges with dialect forms (english
,british
,american
;ngerman
,german
,naustrian
, ...). See for example tex.stackexchange.com/q/432347/35864. Most of those packages won't exactly break withpolyglossia
, but they work better/smoother withbabel
.– moewe
yesterday
2
I don't think there is any reason to use
polyglossia
overbabel
forlualatex
.– David Purton
yesterday
1
@JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.
– David Carlisle
yesterday
2
@Davislor It's even worse --
defaultfontfeatures
is ignored altogether. This is a bug, already fixed on the repository. I'll upload the new version to CTAN very likely tomorrow.– Javier Bezos
yesterday