X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1115" "Sat" "28" "November" "1998" "12:14:56" "+0000" "Robin Fairbairns" "Robin.Fairbairns@CL.CAM.AC.UK" nil "29" "Re: portable LaTeX" "^Date:" nil nil "11" nil nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA31070; Sat, 28 Nov 1998 13:15:05 +0100 (MET) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.2) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <2.934179C8@listserv.gmd.de>; Sat, 28 Nov 1998 13:15:04 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 411261 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sat, 28 Nov 1998 13:14:59 +0100 Received: from heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk (exim@heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk [128.232.32.11]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id NAA16429 for ; Sat, 28 Nov 1998 13:14:57 +0100 (MET) Received: from dorceus.cl.cam.ac.uk (cl.cam.ac.uk) [128.232.1.34] (rf) by heaton.cl.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 1.82 #1) id 0zjjH8-0008D2-00; Sat, 28 Nov 1998 12:14:58 +0000 Message-ID: Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 28 Nov 1998 12:43:01 +0100." <13919.57622.145781.34105@fell.open.ac.uk> Date: Sat, 28 Nov 1998 12:14:56 +0000 From: Robin Fairbairns Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: portable LaTeX Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 2978 chris rowley wrote: > Sebastian Rahtz wrote -- > > > DSSSL, an ISO standard developed after a decade of work... > > Now why does immediately bring to my mind the legendary Algol68 > standard ... algol68 was fine; compiler technology at the time wasn't. almost all my mainframe programming from about 1970 on was in algol68, and i came to like it very well. but the compiler could only manage a subset of the language. dsssl is a different kettle of fish. i knew about the project pretty soon after i first started in standardisation, and didn't see even a dis until after my last ever iso meeting 5 years ago. i guess it was more than 10 years' work end to end. nowadays, such a project would have been chopped long before finishing, no question. i really don't understand how they got away with it even under the old dispensation. > I must be getting (even more) old and cynical? i'll agree with the first (don't we all? -- groan), but the second ... well, trying to keep latex3 going at all must have an (ahem) interesting effect on all your psyches. it's tim murphy's capital T that bothers me... r