MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <v02130504b03c3f177f16@[130.237.37.138]>
            <199709111629.MAA14306@fenris.math.albany.edu>
Message-ID:  <7080-Fri12Sep1997092816+0100-s.rahtz@elsevier.co.uk>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
In-Reply-To:  <199709111629.MAA14306@fenris.math.albany.edu>
Date:         Fri, 12 Sep 1997 09:28:16 +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: HyperLaTeX
Status: R

 > One set comes from the HyperTeX project, and the other from YandY (a
 > commercial package for the PC, which, as far as I know, is the only
 > PC based system that uses ANY kind of hypertex.)
Scientific Word supports the same sort of thing, doesnt it?

 > Neither group supports the \specials from the other.
at the \special level, true. but at the package level, you can just
use hyperref, which has drivers for dvips, dvipsone, dviwindo,
hypertex, and pdftex.

 > A standard for hypertex specials would be EXTREMELY useful, as,
 > currently, there is no way to provide hypertex dvis readable on both
 > unix and PC platforms.
until Fabrice Popineau manages to finish the port of xdvi to Windows
that he is working on, perhaps.

my *personal* feeling is that using dvi as the interchange file is
pretty much doomed anyway. pdf has all the advantages, and few disadvantages
(the only one is size, really).

 > Thus, if you want to distribute hyperlinked
 > documents accessible to all, pdf seems the best answer. (Hyperps also
or HTML :-}

sebastian