References: <pc910inkm2.fsf@epsilon.ams.org>
            <199706110929.KAA19914@lochnagarn.elsevier.co.uk>
            <199706110956.TAA01247@flash.anu.edu.au>
            <199706111026.LAA24123@lochnagarn.elsevier.co.uk>
            <199706111103.VAA01304@flash.anu.edu.au>
Message-ID:  <199706111134.MAA28316@lochnagarn.elsevier.co.uk>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
In-Reply-To:  <199706111103.VAA01304@flash.anu.edu.au>
Date:         Wed, 11 Jun 1997 12:34:27 +0100
From: Sebastian Rahtz <s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.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: automatic numbering
Status: R

 > Yes, that's what I had in mind.  I think that is the `bigger issue'
 > here.  Getting page numbers etc. right is just a `symptom' of a bigger
 > `disease'.
Indeed. Did you read Matt's paper? this was his big thessis

 >  > Elsevier, for what its worth, combines articles at the printing level:-}

 > I'm surprised.  A pity.  We should be able to do much better.
why? so far as we are concerned, the unit is the article. thats what
has the coherence, the copyright, the sale. combining articles into a
journal issue is rather mechanical. combining them into a book is a such
a philosophical nightmare anyway.....

glorious issues like duplicate labels come to mind. 2 \cites with
different labels pointing to same thing (how to handle back
cites?). etc

but i was not entirely sure whose problems Michel is really trying to solve

Sebastian