doc fixes

git-svn-id: svn://tug.org/texlive/trunk@15423 c570f23f-e606-0410-a88d-b1316a301751

1 files changed, 52 insertions, 43 deletions

diff --git a/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/lualatexiniconfig.tex b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/lualatexiniconfig.tex
index dcca3a3cecf..8d1ae191552 100644
--- a/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/lualatexiniconfig.tex
+++ b/Master/texmf-dist/tex/latex/latexconfig/lualatexiniconfig.tex
@@ -18,47 +18,56 @@
 
 % Rationale for primitives prefixing.
 %
-% 1. All current macro packages run smoothly on top of pdf(e)TeX, so those
+% 1 All current macro packages run smoothly on top of pdf(e)TeX, so those
 %   primitives are left untouched.
-% 2. Other non-TeX82 primitives in LuaTeX may cause name clashes with existing
-%   macros in macro packages, especially when the use very "natural" names
-%   such as \outputbox, \mathstyle etc. Such a probability for name clashes is
-%   highly undesirable if LuaTeX is to replace pdfTeX as the default engine
-%   some day, and still undesirable even if it does not, anyway, since some
-%   level of compatibility never hurts.
-% 3. The LuaTeX team doesn't want to apply a systematic prefixing policy, but
-%   kindly provided a tool allowing to apply it. So we chose to use it.
-%   Previously, we even disabled the extra primitives, but now we feel it's
-%   better to enable them with systematic prefexing, in order to avoid that
-%   each and every macro package (or user) enables them with various and
-%   inconsistent prefixes (including the empty prefix).
-% 4. The 'luatex' prefix was chosen since it is already used as a prefix for
-%   some primitives, such as \luatexversion: since way, those promitive don't
-%   end up with a double prefix (see tex.enableprimitive in the luatex manual
-%   for details).
-% 5. The \directlua primitive is provided both with its natural name (allowing
-%   to easily detect LuaTeX-besed formats) and a prefixed version
-%   \luatexdirectlua (for consistency with \luatexlatelua).
-% 6. Various remarks
-%   (a) The obvious drawback of such a prefixing policy is that the names used
-%     by LaTeX or generic macro writer won't match the names used in the
-%     manual.  We hope this is compensated by the gain in backwards
-%     compatibility.
-%   (b) All primitives dealing with Unicode math already begin with \U, and
-%     maybe will match the names of XeTeX primitives some day, so maybe
-%     prefixing was not necessary/desirable for them. However, we tried to
-%     make the prefixing rule as simple as possible, so that point (a) doesn't
-%     get too annoying.
-%   (c) The final name of some primitive may sound strange, namely those
-%     already containing the name of an engine, such as \luatexOmegaVersion.
-%     However, since LuaTeX is not a drop-in replacement for Omega/Aleph, we
-%     felt it wrong to provide \OmegaVersion.
-%   (d) Maybe some day we'll realise that it is better to provide all
-%     primitives without prefixing at all, after all. If this happens, it will
-%     be easy to add the unprefixed primitives in the format while keeping the
-%     prefixed names for compatibility. It wouldn't work the other way round
-%     (ie, realising that we should not provide the unprefixed primitives
-%     would cause huge compatibility problems for all LuaTeX-specific macro
-%     packages).
-
-
+% 
+% 2 Other non-TeX82 primitives in LuaTeX may cause name clashes with
+%   existing macros in macro packages, especially when they use very
+%   "natural" names such as \outputbox, \mathstyle etc. Such a
+%   probability for name clashes is undesirable, since the most existing
+%   LaTeX documents that run without change under LuaTeX, the better.
+%   
+% 3 The LuaTeX team doesn't want to apply a systematic prefixing policy,
+%   but kindly provided a tool allowing prefixes to be applied. So we
+%   chose to use it.  Previously, we even disabled the extra primitives,
+%   but now we feel it's better to enable them with systematic
+%   prefexing, in order to avoid that each and every macro package (or
+%   user) enables them with various and inconsistent prefixes (including
+%   the empty prefix).
+%   
+% 4 The 'luatex' prefix was chosen since it is already used as a prefix
+%   for some primitives, such as \luatexversion: this way, those
+%   promitive don't end up with a double prefix (see
+%   tex.enableprimitives in the luatex manual for details).
+%   
+% 5 The \directlua primitive is provided both with its natural name
+%   (allowing easy detection of LuaTeX-besed formats) and a prefixed
+%    version \luatexdirectlua (for consistency with \luatexlatelua).
+%   
+% 6 Various remarks:
+% (a) The obvious drawback of such a prefixing policy is that the names
+%     used by LaTeX or generic macro writer won't match the names used
+%     in the manual.  We hope this is compensated by the gain in
+%     backwards compatibility.
+%     
+% (b) All primitives dealing with Unicode math already begin with \U,
+%     and maybe will match the names of XeTeX primitives some day, so
+%     maybe prefixing was not necessary/desirable for them. However, we
+%     tried to make the prefixing rule as simple as possible, so that
+%     point (a) doesn't get even worse.
+%     
+% (c) The final name of some primitive may sound strange, namely those
+%     already containing the name of an engine, such as
+%     \luatexOmegaVersion.  However, since LuaTeX is not a drop-in
+%     replacement for Omega/Aleph, we felt it wrong to provide
+%     \OmegaVersion.
+%     
+% (d) Maybe some day we'll feel it's better to provide all
+%     primitives without prefixing. If this happens, it
+%     will be easy to add the unprefixed primitives in the format while
+%     keeping the prefixed names for compatibility. It wouldn't work the
+%     other way round; i.e., belaatedly realizing that we should not
+%     provide the unprefixed primitives would then cause break
+%     any LuaTeX-specific macro packages that had been written.
+%
+% --Manuel and Karl, September 2009.