X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil]
	["390" "Tue" "17" "June" "1997" "22:31:36" "+0200" "Hans Aberg" "haberg@MATEMATIK.SU.SE" nil "10" "Re: ideal future document processing environment" "^Date:" nil nil "6" nil nil nil nil nil]
	nil)
Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1])
          by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.5/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id WAA32525; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 22:30:54 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <6.8BEAB917@listserv.gmd.de>; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 22:30:39 +0200
Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
          (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 154875 for
          LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 22:30:25 +0200
Received: from mail.nada.kth.se (root@mail.nada.kth.se [130.237.222.92]) by
          relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.7.6/8.7.4) with ESMTP id WAA29795 for
          <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 22:30:23
          +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from [130.237.37.152] (sl126.modempool.kth.se [130.237.37.152]) by
          mail.nada.kth.se (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP id WAA29612 for
          <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>; Tue, 17 Jun 1997 22:30:21
          +0200 (MET DST)
X-Sender: su95-hab@mail.nada.kth.se
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Message-ID:  <v02130500afcca2c58499@[130.237.37.152]>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Date:         Tue, 17 Jun 1997 22:31:36 +0200
From: Hans Aberg <haberg@MATEMATIK.SU.SE>
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: ideal future document processing environment
Status: R
X-Status: 
X-Keywords:                  
X-UID: 2091

Mark Steinberger <mark@CSC.ALBANY.EDU> wrote:
>Is there an adequate reason to move away from TeX? If not, then
>authoring tools should be TeX-based.

  I think the answer to this question is that if there emerges something
that people find better, they will switch to that. The ideal would probably
be switching to something that is in some sense upwards compatible with
TeX.

  Hans Aberg