X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["830" "Mon" "1" "March" "93" "17:38:48" "GMT" "spqr@MINSTER.YORK.AC.UK" "spqr@MINSTER.YORK.AC.UK" nil "18" "Re: would a latex2.10 give a boost to latex3?" "^Date:" nil nil "3"]) Return-Path: Received: from sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (mailserv) by dagobert.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0/1.9.92 ) id AA29877; Mon, 1 Mar 93 19:55:59 +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 AA19171; Mon, 1 Mar 93 19:55:55 +0100 Message-Id: <9303011855.AA19171@sc.zib-berlin.dbp.de> Received: from DHDURZ1 by vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 6032; Mon, 01 Mar 93 19:56:17 CET Received: from DHDURZ1 by DHDURZ1 (Mailer R2.08 R208004) with BSMTP id 5659; Mon, 01 Mar 93 19:56:13 CET Received: from DHDURZ1 by DHDURZ1 (Mailer R2.08 R208004) with BSMTP id 5657; Mon, 01 Mar 93 19:56:11 CET Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Date: Mon, 1 Mar 93 17:38:48 GMT From: spqr@MINSTER.YORK.AC.UK Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple Recipients of Subject: Re: would a latex2.10 give a boost to latex3? Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 993 > WHICH (of the many versions that could be implemented in your format file) > NFSS do you mean? If I send you a LaTeX file that uses msam, eufb, > or even cmdunh say, at what point are you prepared to notice a problem? NFSS2 will largely do away with this, I reckon. i dont want *any* fonts in my format... > But there are other good things which could be included as standard, > which WOULD be incompatible with Lamport. For instance, I load verbatim.sty > into my format, and this behaves differently to verbatim in 2.09. > \verb also behaves inconsistently with 2.09, as I discovered recently when > sending a file to someone without verbatim.sty loaded. What about > multicol and array and all the other bits and pieces? i never said it would not be a substantial piece of work to gte 2.10 in place... Sebastian