X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1517" "Wed" "8" "October" "1997" "09:26:22" "+0100" "Robin Fairbairns" "Robin.Fairbairns@CL.CAM.AC.UK" nil "34" "Re: LaTeX journal and publisher macros" "^Date:" nil nil "10" nil nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id KAA23662; Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:26:34 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <4.1C31A74E@listserv.gmd.de>; Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:26:32 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 210410 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:26:26 +0200 Received: from heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk (exim@heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.32.11]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.7/8.8.7) with SMTP id KAA21053 for ; Wed, 8 Oct 1997 10:26:24 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from dorceus.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.1.34] (rf) by heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 1.70 #3) id 0xIrRo-0005CT-00; Wed, 8 Oct 1997 09:26:24 +0100 Message-ID: Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 07 Oct 1997 19:26:40 +0200." Date: Wed, 8 Oct 1997 09:26:22 +0100 From: Robin Fairbairns Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: LaTeX journal and publisher macros Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2391 Hans Aberg writes (quoting Barbara Beeton): > >and there are still articles submitted in plain tex, which tugboat > >is not going to refuse if the material is relevant and well written. > >in fact, as some such articles propose non-latex solutions, it may > >be impossible to process them at all using latex. This is (a) in the nature of things and (b) as it should be (IMHO, anyway: I wouldn't enjoy reading a TUB paper that said "here are some macros to do in plain something that LaTeX people take for granted"). Barbara went on to deplore the fact that she/we can't any longer (in our brave new LaTeX world) run a whole issue in one pass through TeX. In fact, since I've joined the production team, there have been articles that required us to build an extended TeX, or to hack at standard macros, to get them to run on their own. Hans remarked: > I suggested LaTeX should have a PlainTeX class, so that could > conveniently migrate from PlainTeX to LaTeX... There's a perfectly good plain.sty, which David Carlisle updates whenever something new proves to be necessary. A class really isn't the right thing, since classes are there to implement document designs, and the very essence of plain is that it *doesn't* impose a document design. In the TUGboat instance, in fact, implementation of a version of its `plain' macro set for use within a LaTeX framework is another ambition I'd rather given up on. If there were enough hours in the day, I might give it another pass, but unfortunately... Robin