Ralf > I am not sure, but the time to do this might be better spend extending > the Unicode-coverage of the UTF-8 implementation in inputenc.sty. > AFAIK that's the area where ucs.sty is still better than inputenc.sty. That would be true as utf8 in inputenc was deliberately limited to characters that were clearly intended for use with the standard LaTeX 8-bit font encodings. chris