Message-ID:  <E0wHS0p-0003pn-00@heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
In-Reply-To:  Your message of "Wed, 16 Apr 1997 12:11:41 +0200." 
              <v02130500af7a4fd4d042@[130.237.37.154]>
Date:         Wed, 16 Apr 1997 11:32:26 +0100
From: Robin Fairbairns <Robin.Fairbairns@CL.CAM.AC.UK>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Subject:      Re: LaTeX forever (Was: math fonts, ALternatives to LaTeX)
Status: R

Hans Aberg writes:

>   In fact, I disagree, because as far as the TeX community is concerned, it
> might well be a good idea that everbody has an interest in LaTeX, at least
> as ideals in the following senses:
>
> 1. LaTeX should be developed so TeX package writers might prefer to write
> it as a LaTeX package rather than an independent package.

While this obviously an aim, there are the plain-evangelists who are
unlikely ever to submit to this `awful imposition' (as they see it).
Some of them are merely dotty, but there are high-quality macro
programmers who fit into this category too ... we're unlikely to
convince them however hard we try, so that there'll continue to be
`independent' packages generated.

> 2. Users might prefer to use LaTeX plus some LaTeX packages, rather than
> independent packages.

Again, there are the evangelists who consider that using plain (or
whatever) is in some sense `easier', regardless of any evidence to the
contrary.

Robin Fairbairns