X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["918" "Wed" "16" "February" "1994" "15:58:41" "WET" "Michel Goossens" "GOOSSENS@crnvma.cern.ch" nil "18" "Re: Style in LaTeX-3" "^Date:" nil nil "2" nil nil nil nil]) Return-Path: Received: from sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (mailserv) by dagobert.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0/24.6.93) id AA01235; Wed, 16 Feb 94 16:34:19 +0100 Received: from mail.cs.tu-berlin.de by sc.ZIB-Berlin.DE (4.1/SMI-4.0-sc/03.06.93) id AA25177; Wed, 16 Feb 94 16:33:16 +0100 Received: from tubvm.cs.tu-berlin.de by mail.cs.tu-berlin.de with SMTP id AA00477 (5.65c8/IDA-1.4.4(mail.m4[1.12]) for <@MAIL.CS.TU-BERLIN.DE:Schoepf@SC.ZIB-BERLIN.DE>); Wed, 16 Feb 1994 16:33:12 +0100 Message-Id: <199402161533.AA00477@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 2421; Wed, 16 Feb 94 16:32:47 +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 2419; Wed, 16 Feb 1994 16:32:45 +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 6870; Wed, 16 Feb 1994 16:31:55 +0000 Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: Message of Wed, 16 Feb 1994 13:44:30 LCL from Date: Wed, 16 Feb 1994 15:58:41 WET From: Michel Goossens Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: Style in LaTeX-3 Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1567 I propose that Mike Piff tries and implements a better version for all the LaTeX code for which he continues enumerating the shortcomings on this list. In this way the LaTeX3 team can get on with providing a version with improves LaTeX2.09 by building on the _existing_ code, guaranteeing backwards compatibility, plus providing the advantage of one and single format to support. As Frank and many others pointed out, we, (the LaTeX user community) will be delighted is such knowledgeable experts like Mike contribute by making their extensions or improvements available within the framework of the _existing_ system. Pointing out the shortcomings, and then hoping that they will be mended, as by miracle, is not a very productive approach. And, moreover, it keeps much-needed manpower away from doing the good work: making latex2e the success it deserves to be. Michel Goossens / CERN