X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["2098" "Thu" "10" "December" "1998" "10:18:02" "+0000" "Sebastian Rahtz" "s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK" nil "48" "Re: portable LaTeX" "^Date:" nil nil "12" 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 LAA30807; Thu, 10 Dec 1998 11:36:53 +0100 (MET) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.2) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <11.C94CC1C1@listserv.gmd.de>; Thu, 10 Dec 1998 11:36:27 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 412155 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Thu, 10 Dec 1998 11:35:24 +0100 Received: from pillar.elsevier.co.uk (root@pillar.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.222.35]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id LAA05175 for ; Thu, 10 Dec 1998 11:33:18 +0100 (MET) Received: from snowdon.elsevier.co.uk [193.131.197.164]; by pillar.elsevier.co.uk (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP; for ""; sender "s.rahtz@elsevier.co.uk"; id KAA27721; hop 0; Thu, 10 Dec 1998 10:24:50 GMT Received: from srahtz (actually host srahtz.elsevier.co.uk) by snowdon.elsevier.co.uk with SMTP (PP); Thu, 10 Dec 1998 10:31:42 +0000 X-Mailer: emacs 20.3.2 (via feedmail 9-beta-3 Q); VM 6.61 under Emacs 20.3.2 References: <199812092035.VAA16014@na6.mathematik.uni-tuebingen.de> Message-ID: <3995-Thu10Dec1998101802+0000-s.rahtz@elsevier.co.uk> Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: <199812092035.VAA16014@na6.mathematik.uni-tuebingen.de> Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 10:18:02 +0000 From: Sebastian Rahtz 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: 3059 Marcel Oliver writes: > So would anybody be interested seriously set up a portable LaTeX > project? i, for one, could consider asking my management to allow me time to work on it. i would volunteer to work on the reference LaTeX-subset to *ML converter. > I think the frontmatter/bibliography stuff we have discussed enough, but we havent resolved it...:-} > For area 3, one would initially need at least one reference > implementation of a LaTeX to *ML converter were one must make sure > that it supports a complete portable LaTeX standard which allows > serious scientific publishing without unnecessary restrictions. (Would > the Elsevier converter come close to this description?) Moreover, a the Elsevier converter is slightly odd. I would suggest, rather, that a TeX4ht configuration to produce XML/MathML is more realistic, and portable. Eitan Gurari and I have done a lot of this already. > (TeX based) LaTeX package for verifying that the portability of a > LaTeX file. we tried that once here. one can go quite a long way, i think > - LaTeX is hackable. While this is certainly opposed to the goals of a .. > I believe a lot of resistance to a pure *ML solution comes from the > fear for loss of hackability. of course, i agree. its a real issue a cautionary tale: i am in the process of learning Java, and have great problems readjusting myself to a `real' language after the freedom of Perl. but i will persist, because I know my Perl programs are not going to stand the test of time. i feel the same about LaTeX - I can write fast in it, like it, get results with it, but I know its not good for me. so i must force myself to readjust. i'll do my hacking in a different part of the process > Do people feel that such an approach is useful and has a sufficient > chance of success? If so, would anybody actually do some work? I am i feel very strongly that your suggestions will get nowhere without a single leader, who can devote real time to it. i know i advocate Bazaarism, but in this case, it'll get nowhere without a coordinator. IMHO. Sebastian