Decide between Polyglossia and Babel for LuaLaTeX in 2019 The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Decide between Polyglossia and Babel in 2012DeclareLanguageMappingSuffix, inheritance, and polyglossia in biblatexHow is the support for polyglossia in LuaLaTeX?Decide between Polyglossia and Babel for XeLaTeX in 2019Decide between Polyglossia and Babel in 2012Problem 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

Working through the single responsibility principle (SRP) in Python when calls are expensive

Python - Fishing Simulator

Are spiders unable to hurt humans, especially very small spiders?

First use of “packing” as in carrying a gun

Am I ethically obligated to go into work on an off day if the reason is sudden?

Is there a writing software that you can sort scenes like slides in PowerPoint?

Why not take a picture of a closer black hole?

Change bounding box of math glyphs in LuaTeX

A pet rabbit called Belle

What was the last x86 CPU that did not have the x87 floating-point unit built in?

"... to apply for a visa" or "... and applied for a visa"?

How is simplicity better than precision and clarity in prose?

Grover's algorithm - DES circuit as oracle?

Why did all the guest students take carriages to the Yule Ball?

Is it ok to offer lower paid work as a trial period before negotiating for a full-time job?

The variadic template constructor of my class cannot modify my class members, why is that so?

What aspect of planet Earth must be changed to prevent the industrial revolution?

Match Roman Numerals

Is a pteranodon too powerful as a beast companion for a beast master?

Why can't wing-mounted spoilers be used to steepen approaches?

He got a vote 80% that of Emmanuel Macron’s

How can I protect witches in combat who wear limited clothing?

system call string length limit

How does ice melt when immersed in water



Decide between Polyglossia and Babel for LuaLaTeX in 2019



The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are In
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 17/18, 2019 at 00:00UTC (8:00pm US/Eastern)Decide between Polyglossia and Babel in 2012DeclareLanguageMappingSuffix, inheritance, and polyglossia in biblatexHow is the support for polyglossia in LuaLaTeX?Decide between Polyglossia and Babel for XeLaTeX in 2019Decide between Polyglossia and Babel in 2012Problem 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










10















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









share|improve this question

















  • 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
    Mar 31 at 10:22






  • 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
    Mar 31 at 10:27







  • 2





    I don't think there is any reason to use polyglossia over babel for lualatex.

    – David Purton
    Mar 31 at 10:33






  • 1





    @JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.

    – David Carlisle
    Mar 31 at 11:35






  • 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
    Mar 31 at 17:48
















10















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









share|improve this question

















  • 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
    Mar 31 at 10:22






  • 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
    Mar 31 at 10:27







  • 2





    I don't think there is any reason to use polyglossia over babel for lualatex.

    – David Purton
    Mar 31 at 10:33






  • 1





    @JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.

    – David Carlisle
    Mar 31 at 11:35






  • 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
    Mar 31 at 17:48














10












10








10


5






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









share|improve this question














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






share|improve this question













share|improve this question











share|improve this question




share|improve this question










asked Mar 31 at 10:13









Jonas SteinJonas Stein

3,34042746




3,34042746







  • 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
    Mar 31 at 10:22






  • 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
    Mar 31 at 10:27







  • 2





    I don't think there is any reason to use polyglossia over babel for lualatex.

    – David Purton
    Mar 31 at 10:33






  • 1





    @JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.

    – David Carlisle
    Mar 31 at 11:35






  • 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
    Mar 31 at 17:48













  • 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
    Mar 31 at 10:22






  • 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
    Mar 31 at 10:27







  • 2





    I don't think there is any reason to use polyglossia over babel for lualatex.

    – David Purton
    Mar 31 at 10:33






  • 1





    @JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.

    – David Carlisle
    Mar 31 at 11:35






  • 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
    Mar 31 at 17:48








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
Mar 31 at 10:22





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
Mar 31 at 10:22




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
Mar 31 at 10:27






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
Mar 31 at 10:27





2




2





I don't think there is any reason to use polyglossia over babel for lualatex.

– David Purton
Mar 31 at 10:33





I don't think there is any reason to use polyglossia over babel for lualatex.

– David Purton
Mar 31 at 10:33




1




1





@JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.

– David Carlisle
Mar 31 at 11:35





@JonasStein why would you think that? There are still many scripts that luatex does not support.

– David Carlisle
Mar 31 at 11:35




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
Mar 31 at 17:48






@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
Mar 31 at 17:48











2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















12














Here's some reasons why I prefer babel over polyglossia for lualatex.




  • babel's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, but poyglossia is only getting a few minor updates.


  • babel's RTL and BiDi support is really nice for lualatex now. But polyglossia only supports RTL text with xelatex.


  • babel's new ini 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, whereas polyglossia basically just uses standard fontspec calls.

  • For standard European languages babel's support is very mature.


  • polyglossia's language variants do not work well with biblatex or csquotes.

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.






share|improve this answer






























    11














    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.






    share|improve this answer























      Your Answer








      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
      );



      );













      draft saved

      draft discarded


















      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









      12














      Here's some reasons why I prefer babel over polyglossia for lualatex.




      • babel's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, but poyglossia is only getting a few minor updates.


      • babel's RTL and BiDi support is really nice for lualatex now. But polyglossia only supports RTL text with xelatex.


      • babel's new ini 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, whereas polyglossia basically just uses standard fontspec calls.

      • For standard European languages babel's support is very mature.


      • polyglossia's language variants do not work well with biblatex or csquotes.

      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.






      share|improve this answer



























        12














        Here's some reasons why I prefer babel over polyglossia for lualatex.




        • babel's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, but poyglossia is only getting a few minor updates.


        • babel's RTL and BiDi support is really nice for lualatex now. But polyglossia only supports RTL text with xelatex.


        • babel's new ini 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, whereas polyglossia basically just uses standard fontspec calls.

        • For standard European languages babel's support is very mature.


        • polyglossia's language variants do not work well with biblatex or csquotes.

        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.






        share|improve this answer

























          12












          12








          12







          Here's some reasons why I prefer babel over polyglossia for lualatex.




          • babel's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, but poyglossia is only getting a few minor updates.


          • babel's RTL and BiDi support is really nice for lualatex now. But polyglossia only supports RTL text with xelatex.


          • babel's new ini 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, whereas polyglossia basically just uses standard fontspec calls.

          • For standard European languages babel's support is very mature.


          • polyglossia's language variants do not work well with biblatex or csquotes.

          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.






          share|improve this answer













          Here's some reasons why I prefer babel over polyglossia for lualatex.




          • babel's base is part of the LaTeX core packages actively developed, but poyglossia is only getting a few minor updates.


          • babel's RTL and BiDi support is really nice for lualatex now. But polyglossia only supports RTL text with xelatex.


          • babel's new ini 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, whereas polyglossia basically just uses standard fontspec calls.

          • For standard European languages babel's support is very mature.


          • polyglossia's language variants do not work well with biblatex or csquotes.

          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.







          share|improve this answer












          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer










          answered Mar 31 at 11:15









          David PurtonDavid Purton

          11.3k2944




          11.3k2944





















              11














              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.






              share|improve this answer



























                11














                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.






                share|improve this answer

























                  11












                  11








                  11







                  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.






                  share|improve this answer













                  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.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered Mar 31 at 10:33









                  Ulrike FischerUlrike Fischer

                  199k9306692




                  199k9306692



























                      draft saved

                      draft discarded
















































                      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.




                      draft saved


                      draft discarded














                      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





















































                      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







                      Popular posts from this blog

                      Adding axes to figuresAdding axes labels to LaTeX figuresLaTeX equivalent of ConTeXt buffersRotate a node but not its content: the case of the ellipse decorationHow to define the default vertical distance between nodes?TikZ scaling graphic and adjust node position and keep font sizeNumerical conditional within tikz keys?adding axes to shapesAlign axes across subfiguresAdding figures with a certain orderLine up nested tikz enviroments or how to get rid of themAdding axes labels to LaTeX figures

                      Luettelo Yhdysvaltain laivaston lentotukialuksista Lähteet | Navigointivalikko

                      Gary (muusikko) Sisällysluettelo Historia | Rockin' High | Lähteet | Aiheesta muualla | NavigointivalikkoInfobox OKTuomas "Gary" Keskinen Ancaran kitaristiksiProjekti Rockin' High