X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["873" "Thu" "10" "February" "1994" "23:41:18" "+0100" "Johannes L. Braams" "J.L.Braams@research.ptt.nl" "<199402102242.AA05533@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de>" "19" "Re: On compatibility in LaTeX2e [was: Re: keyed options lis" "^Date:" nil nil "2" "1994021022:41:18" "On compatibility in LaTeX2e [was: Re: keyed options lis" nil "<01H8QFVJTPQA9PMN4M@research.ptt.nl>"]) Return-Path: Received: from sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (mailserv) by dagobert.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0/24.6.93) id AA18576; Thu, 10 Feb 94 23:43:38 +0100 Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de by sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0-sc/03.06.93) id AA04801; Thu, 10 Feb 94 23:42:59 +0100 Received: from tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de with SMTP id AA05533 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4(mail.m4[1.12]) for <@MAIL.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE:Schoepf@SC.ZIB-BERLIN.DE>); Thu, 10 Feb 1994 23:42:57 +0100 Message-Id: <199402102242.AA05533@mail.cs.tu-berlin.de> Received: from TUBVM.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE by tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with BSMTP id 8001; Thu, 10 Feb 94 23:42:45 +0200 Received: from VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (NJE origin MAILER@DHDURZ1) by TUBVM.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 8000; Thu, 10 Feb 1994 23:42:45 +0200 Received: from VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (NJE origin LISTSERV@DHDURZ1) by VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1832; Thu, 10 Feb 1994 23:42:11 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 10 Feb 94 20:49:00 +0100." <01H8QFVJTPQA9PMN4M@research.ptt.nl> Date: Thu, 10 Feb 1994 23:41:18 +0100 From: "Johannes L. Braams" Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: On compatibility in LaTeX2e [was: Re: keyed options lis Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1531 On Thursday, February 10 POPPE@swov.nl wrote: > In the coming years users will be forced (eg by local style designers > who want to use possibilities of LaTeX2e) to switch to \documentclass > syntax and other "new" commands. If LaTeX3 would force them to yet > another command that would give LaTeX (and possibly TeX) a "bad name". Have such happenings ever given WordPervert a `bad name'? Having to rewrite your maros' when upgrading rom 4.2 to 5 being told this won't happen again, but having to rewrite non the less or version 6? (Couldn't resist) Johannes Braams: PTT Research, P.O. box 421, :2260 AK Leidschendam, The Netherlands. Phone : +31 70 3325051 E-mail : J.L.Braams@research.ptt.nl Fax : +31 70 3326477 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------