Message-Id: <9302050619.AA26353@sc.zib-berlin.dbp.de>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de>
Date:         Fri, 5 Feb 93 07:20:18 CET
From: Don Hosek <DHOSEK@HMCVAX.CLAREMONT.EDU>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de>
To: Multiple Recipients of <LATEX-L@vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de>
Subject:      Re: document classes & numbering systems
Status: R


Well, to summarize where I stand on the whole issue and I'll back
out of the discussion because it's starting getting silly:

I fear that making numbering style a fundamental part of document
style class will lead to a needless fracturing of classes into
potentially thousands of classes. The fact of the matter is that
most texts will print fine regardless of how structures are
numbered ("Number A" is already part of the vernacular, albeit a
part that makes students giggle). I think that a clear statement
to LaTeX users in documentation that structurally-oriented
typesetting is not a magic pill that will free them from thinking
about all stylistic issues forever but that it defers it and a
listing of the most common issues will be enough to cover this. I
think good documentation and a little common sense will be an
adequate solution to the problem.

The idea of thhe numbering styles written to the .aux file is
enticing, although it might be a bit difficult to do under
duress, I don't know.

-dh