[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LaTeX forever (Was: math fonts, ALternatives to LaTeX)
- To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
- Subject: Re: LaTeX forever (Was: math fonts, ALternatives to LaTeX)
- From: Robin Fairbairns <Robin.Fairbairns@CL.CAM.AC.UK>
- Date: Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:32:26 +0100
- Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
- Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Hans Aberg writes:
> In fact, I disagree, because as far as the TeX community is concerned, it
> might well be a good idea that everbody has an interest in LaTeX, at least
> as ideals in the following senses:
> 1. LaTeX should be developed so TeX package writers might prefer to write
> it as a LaTeX package rather than an independent package.
While this obviously an aim, there are the plain-evangelists who are
unlikely ever to submit to this `awful imposition' (as they see it).
Some of them are merely dotty, but there are high-quality macro
programmers who fit into this category too ... we're unlikely to
convince them however hard we try, so that there'll continue to be
`independent' packages generated.
> 2. Users might prefer to use LaTeX plus some LaTeX packages, rather than
> independent packages.
Again, there are the evangelists who consider that using plain (or
whatever) is in some sense `easier', regardless of any evidence to the