X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1148" "Mon" "14" "December" "1998" "19:27:52" "+0100" "Hans Aberg" "haberg@MATEMATIK.SU.SE" nil "25" "Re: portable LaTeX" "^Date:" nil nil "12" nil "portable LaTeX" 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 TAA26357; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:29:12 +0100 (MET) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.2) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <0.600D6858@listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:28:22 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 413521 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:28:11 +0100 Received: from mail0.nada.kth.se (mail0.nada.kth.se [130.237.222.70]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA03597 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:28:09 +0100 (MET) Received: from [130.237.37.57] (sl47.modempool.kth.se [130.237.37.67]) by mail0.nada.kth.se (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA27193 for ; Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:27:54 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: su95-hab@mail.nada.kth.se References: ; from Hans Aberg on Mon, Dec 14, 1998 at 04:55:25PM +0100 <13938.39518.68424.927988@fell.open.ac.uk> <199812092035.VAA16014@na6.mathematik.uni-tuebingen.de> <13941.7255.489674.140731@srahtz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: <19981214180120.E29182@maths.tcd.ie> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1998 19:27:52 +0100 From: Hans Aberg 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: 3114 At 18:01 +0000 1998/12/14, Timothy Murphy wrote: >> Clearly the disadvantage with PDF is that it is a commercial product, and >> that it is somewhat too primitive to be used as a WWW-bytecode standard. >Is it any more (or less) commercial than PostScript? I recall that these are made by the same company, so they probably sport the same problems. As an example of the problems that may arise is the story of Display PostScript, which companies such as Apple decided to not use, because they felt Adobe was overcharging the license fees. Then Apple was one of the companies helping starting Adobe, in order to help forwarding electronic typesetting. And now, ehen DPS is no longer hot, it will appear in Apple's next OS, Rhapsody. So with those commercial products, one must expect that everybody tries to bust everybody. It may still happen that things may forward in a more open-minded fashion, but you cannot count on it. Hans Aberg * Email: Hans Aberg * Home Page: * AMS member listing: