Message-Id: <199402091623.AA23967@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
In-Reply-To:  <14565.199402091534@holly.cam.harlequin.co.uk>
Date:         Wed, 9 Feb 1994 16:18:48 GMT
From: Angus Duggan <angus@harlequin.co.uk>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L <LATEX-L@DHDURZ1.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: Continuation lines
Status: R

Joachim Schrod writes:
>You and Anselm should never go in a pub together with Alan (or Angus,
>for that matter). You'll here that `expletive' more often than you've
>ever dreamed of...

Tut, tut, Joachim. Taking my name in vain?

My contribution to this discussion (and to the \footheight one) is to second
Joachim's opinion that this thread is misplaced on the LaTeX3 list, and to
point out that the whole point of LaTeX3 (as I see it, anyway) is that the
style writer's interface will be specified far more rigidly, so style writers
know which bits they can change and which they can't. This will mean that
loads of existing styles may not conform to the style interface, but this does
not necessarily mean that they will not work; backwards compatibility should
be preserved in products unless is impairs development.

a.
--
Angus Duggan, Harlequin Ltd., Barrington Hall,  | INET: angus@harlequin.co.uk
Barrington, Cambridge CB2 5RG, U.K.             | PHONE: +44(0)223 872522