X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["623" "Fri" "14" "July" "1995" "16:10:38" "+0100" "Philip Taylor (RHBNC)" "CHAA006@alpha1.rhbnc.ac.uk" nil "12" "Re: 4 small packages of basic 2e code made available" "^Date:" nil nil "7" nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: from MZDMZA.ZDV.UNI-MAINZ.DE (vzdmzf.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.178.6]) by trudi.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id RAA29353 for ; Fri, 14 Jul 1995 17:13:16 +0200 Received: from DIRECTORY-DAEMON by MZDMZA.ZDV.UNI-MAINZ.DE (PMDF V4.3-12 #4432) id <01HSV9D3N1009VUUQN@MZDMZA.ZDV.UNI-MAINZ.DE>; Fri, 14 Jul 1995 17:12:58 +0100 Received: from listserv.gmd.de by MZDMZA.ZDV.UNI-MAINZ.DE (PMDF V4.3-12 #4432) id <01HSV9D09QMO8WW5V9@MZDMZA.ZDV.UNI-MAINZ.DE>; Fri, 14 Jul 1995 17:12:55 +0100 Received: from listserv.gmd.de by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v0.1a) with SMTP id 857D1B89 ; Fri, 14 Jul 1995 17:12:54 +0200 Received: from VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV release 1.8b) with NJE id 0832 for LATEX-L@VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 14 Jul 1995 17:12:44 +0000 Received: from DHDURZ1 (NJE origin SMTP@DHDURZ1) by VM.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LMail V1.2a/1.8a) with BSMTP id 1800; Fri, 14 Jul 1995 17:10:46 +0000 Received: from vms.rhbnc.ac.uk by vm.urz.Uni-Heidelberg.de (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP; Fri, 14 Jul 95 17:10:45 CET Reply-to: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project Message-id: <950714161038.20c14715@vms.rhbnc.ac.uk> X-Envelope-to: schoepf@goofy.zdv.uni-mainz.de MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 16:10:38 +0100 From: "Philip Taylor (RHBNC)" Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: 4 small packages of basic 2e code made available Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 1688 >> Backing David up on this one... As the LaTeX maintainer here, I know >> that authors swap LaTeX documents between sites, and they get awfully >> confused and annoyed if documents format differently on different >> sites. I am confident ('though I cannot locate the reference as I write) that Leslie Lamport has written that this is perfectly acceptable behaviour, and that LaTeX should be perceived as a document description language rather than one which carries with it an exact specification of the final printed output. Can anyone help in locating that reference? ** Phil.