X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["3323" "Wed" "3" "February" "93" "06:30:37" "CET" "Don Hosek" "DHOSEK@HMCVAX.CLAREMONT.EDU" nil "81" "Re: document classes & numbering systems" "^Date:" nil nil "2"]) Return-Path: Received: from sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (mailserv) by dagobert.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0/1.9.92 ) id AA14494; Wed, 3 Feb 93 06:29:51 +0100 Received: from vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de (vm.hd-net.uni-heidelberg.de) by sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0-sc/19.6.92) id AA20980; Wed, 3 Feb 93 06:29:48 +0100 Message-Id: <9302030529.AA20980@sc.zib-berlin.dbp.de> Received: from DHDURZ1 by vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 3905; Wed, 03 Feb 93 06:30:52 CET Received: from DHDURZ1 by DHDURZ1 (Mailer R2.08 R208004) with BSMTP id 9026; Wed, 03 Feb 93 06:30:50 CET Received: from DHDURZ1 by DHDURZ1 (Mailer R2.08 R208004) with BSMTP id 9024; Wed, 03 Feb 93 06:30:48 CET Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 06:30:37 CET From: Don Hosek Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple Recipients of Subject: Re: document classes & numbering systems Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 917 -There has been some past discussion about the organization of -documentstyles into classes: all members of a class should be -interchangeable in the argument of \documentstyle without requiring -any changes in the document. -Which leads to my question: Suppose one book-class documentstyle has - \def\thechapter{\Roman{chapter}} -and another has - \def\thechapter{\arabic{chapter}} -Are these documentstyles interchangeable? Theoretically---supposing -that the author has carefully used labels and refs---a document will -produce `equivalent' output under each documentstyle, with only 1 and I, -2 and II, 3 and III, ... interchanged. But I hesitate to consider -this true equivalence; the number forms used in a document are, I -would argue, part of the logical structure of the document, rather -than part of the superficial presentation details. The key question is why is numbering style part of the logical structure? Any hard-coded references to numbers are asking for trouble regardless of style changes (I had a nasty problem with some poorly trained typists who hard-coded equation references causing some serious proofreading problems when those sections were later edited to delete some equations and move others). It took me a while, but I found a document which will back me up on this: I have Bibles which have different numbering styles for chapters: some use arabic, some roman, same text. -If so, then -documents of the same class are interchangeable only if: -(1) All documentstyles in a given class conform to a single numbering -system for all predefined environments, sectioning commands, and other -numbered elements. Absolutely untenable. You'll have a near-infinite number of book sub-classes, to say the least. -(2) Any numbering changes are done in the individual documents. To be discouraged at best. Numbering is to be handled by the document style. The only excuse for changing it is when using a generic document style. -On the other hand, it seems wrong to forbid a documentstyle from ever -changing the default numbering of any element. Or at least, current -practice among publishers fairly often includes specifying a -normal numbering style for numbered lists and other numbered elements. -What should a LaTeX documentstyle writer do if faced with this -dilemma? Change the numbering and say that the document is a different -class? Or put all the numbering changes into a documentstyle option -and require that option to be specified in the individual documents? -Or? Put it in the document style. -Although it may not have theoretical significance, there seems to be a -fairly important practical problem for publishers, if they receive an -electronic document containing the declaration \documentstyle{xxxbook} -and they want to change the documentstyle to their own book-class -style `yyybook'. If there are any numbering differences, then it's -quite likely that the entire book will have to be proofread word by -word to catch any instances where the author neglected to use \ref -properly, e.g. by writing "in item~(iii)" instead of "in -item~\ref{abc}". Hard references should be checked in any event because of problems with text being edited and numbers changing. See above. -dh Don Hosek dhosek@ymir.claremont.edu Quixote Digital Typography 714-621-1291