X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["838" "Fri" "10" "October" "1997" "16:53:10" "+0200" "Hans Aberg" "haberg@MATEMATIK.SU.SE" nil "19" "Re: LaTeX & email (Was: 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 QAA13891; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:56:07 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <15.B8B6E679@listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:55:05 +0200 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 211981 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:53:24 +0200 Received: from mail.nada.kth.se (root@mail.nada.kth.se [130.237.222.92]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id QAA12391 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:53:21 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [130.237.37.145] (sl47.modempool.kth.se [130.237.37.67]) by mail.nada.kth.se (8.8.7/8.8.4) with ESMTP id QAA24354 for ; Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:53:19 +0200 (MET DST) X-Sender: su95-hab@mail.nada.kth.se References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: <876489789.39848.BNB@MATH.AMS.ORG> Date: Fri, 10 Oct 1997 16:53:10 +0200 From: Hans Aberg Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: LaTeX & email (Was: LaTeX journal and publisher macros) Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2436 bbeeton: >I can sympathize with this, but I'm unfortunately on the wrong end of >this, working on a vms system... It is not a problem of the vms, but a problem of having outdated email reading software. Perhaps the vms is so outmoded nobody bothers writing software for it anymore; then it is the sign of getting a new computer. Computers outdate rather fast these days, typically 2-4 years, so it is going to happen soon, even if you try to stretch it. >...Apologies for being off-topic... The main point is that LaTeX needs not being concerned about length 72 or 80 or 256 or something else from the technological point of view, even though one can use it to help up the reading. Hans Aberg * AMS member listing: * Email: Hans Aberg