Received: by nummer-3.proteosys id <01C19443.3B432DC4@nummer-3.proteosys>; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:41:42 +0100 Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3B432DC4" x-vm-v5-data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil t t nil][nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: RE: RE: WILD THINGS Date: Thu, 10 Jan 1991 15:12:47 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Sender: "MITTELBACH FRANK" To: "Rainer M. Schoepf" Reply-To: "LaTeX-L Mailing list" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 272 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3B432DC4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Once again, the discussion on LaTeX-L is sailing off into the wild = blue > yonder. The document style should not try to figure out that because > this is the left-hand page of an article for a physics journal edited > by a woman, overlong equations should extend to the right. This kind > of nonsense will produce 126-megabyte document styles that will = exhibit > three new bugs per month for ten years. Of course, the document style should be able to figure out that this is a left hand page and place an example (as in the LaTeX book) into the correct margin. The same might be true for other objects in special application. This is not a question of standard styles, but one of my goals for the LaTeX reimplementation is to provide the necessary tools for the designer to produce such styles if desired. I like Davids analysis of topics (even if I don't always agree), but such a mail like this does not help very much. In this special case, the concept of a `displaysomething' environment looks like a good idea to me, at least much better then telling the user to use center, etc. for things like this. His more explicit ideas in his second mail point this out further. > > Problems such as things that don't fit on a line require user > intervention. They are solved, as the final step in producing a > document, by inserting "visual-formating" commands. > That there are a lot of cases which can not be solved automatically is clear (for this reason I like to have e.g. user/editor invention via attribute). But is not a bad idea to free a standard document from visual formatting by adding standard logical concepts which are missing so far (do not let you guide solely by trying to keep the LaTeX book rewrite to a minimum). This can and should be discussed, that just the reason for this list. > placed on this page of this version of this document. Or, more > generally, on how visual-formating commands, which may have to be > changed each time a new version is created, should be integrated > with the idealogically correct logical-formating commands. > This is an interesting side remark, should there be some way to make visual formatting like \newpage visible? I remember a case where somebody said \samepage without any grouping and it took me a long time to find out why his document was formatted in a funny way. Frank Mittelbach ------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3B432DC4 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable RE: RE: WILD THINGS

>
> Once again, the discussion on LaTeX-L is sailing = off into the wild blue
> yonder.  The document style should not try = to figure out that because
> this is the left-hand page of an article for a = physics journal edited
> by a woman, overlong equations should extend to = the right.  This kind
> of nonsense will produce 126-megabyte document = styles that will exhibit
> three new bugs per month for ten years.

Of course, the document style should be able to = figure
out that this is a left hand page and place an = example
(as in the LaTeX book) into the correct margin. = The
same might be true for other objects in = special
application. This is not a question of standard = styles,
but one of my goals for the LaTeX reimplementation = is
to provide the necessary tools for the designer = to
produce such styles if desired.

I like Davids analysis of topics (even if I = don't
always agree), but such a mail like this does not = help
very much.  In this special case, the concept of = a
`displaysomething' environment looks like a good = idea
to me, at least much better then telling the user = to
use center, etc. for things like this. His = more
explicit ideas in his second mail point this = out
further.

>
> Problems such as things that don't fit on a line = require user
> intervention.  They are solved, as the = final step in producing a
> document, by inserting = "visual-formating" commands.
>
That there are a lot of cases which can not be = solved
automatically is clear (for this reason I like to = have
e.g. user/editor invention via attribute). But is not = a
bad idea to free a standard document from  = visual
formatting by adding standard logical concepts = which
are missing so far (do not let you guide solely = by
trying to keep the LaTeX book rewrite to a = minimum).
This can and should be discussed, that just the = reason
for this list.

> placed on this page of this version of this = document.  Or, more
> generally, on how visual-formating commands, = which may have to be
> changed each time a new version is created, = should be integrated
> with the idealogically correct logical-formating = commands.
>

This is an interesting side remark, should there = be
some way to make visual formatting like = \newpage
visible? I remember a case where somebody said
\samepage without any grouping and it took me a = long
time to find out why his document was formatted in = a
funny way.

Frank Mittelbach


------_=_NextPart_001_01C19443.3B432DC4--