X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1537" "Tue" "15" "December" "1998" "10:25:41" "+0000" "Sebastian Rahtz" "s.rahtz@ELSEVIER.CO.UK" nil "32" "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 MAA21856; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 12:12:00 +0100 (MET) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.2) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <8.807AA999@listserv.gmd.de>; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 11:49:57 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 413300 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 11:49:54 +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 LAA21369 for ; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 11:49:44 +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 KAA21417; hop 0; Tue, 15 Dec 1998 10:41:00 GMT Received: from srahtz (actually host srahtz.elsevier.co.uk) by snowdon.elsevier.co.uk with SMTP (PP); Tue, 15 Dec 1998 10:48:48 +0000 X-Mailer: emacs 20.3.2 (via feedmail 9-beta-3 Q); VM 6.61 under Emacs 20.3.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <13938.39518.68424.927988@fell.open.ac.uk> <199812092035.VAA16014@na6.mathematik.uni-tuebingen.de> <199812141457.IAA15514@dcdrjh.fnal.gov> <13941.11832.164081.296097@srahtz> <19981214170857.D29182@maths.tcd.ie> Message-ID: <13942.14629.333293.157446@srahtz> Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: <19981214170857.D29182@maths.tcd.ie> Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1998 10:25:41 +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: 3125 Timothy Murphy writes: > And the discussion about the internal semantics of new pdfTeX primitives, > most of which would be far better dealt with > as \special's in a DVI file, > leads me to conclude that pdfTeX and Knuth TeX > are rapidly diverging. why is this such a bad thing? Knuth wrote TeX and said "here you go, peeps, do with it what you will, but just make sure that `TeX' remains `TeX'". he never said "if you use my code you must follow all my misguided decisions as if they were tablets of stone" > While Thanh's pdfTeX is a marvellous piece of work, which satisfied > an urgent need, in my view it is fundamentally misconceived, and > will in time be replaced by a version based on possibly extended > DVI. replace "will" with "may conceivably", and I might agree. however, the history of attempts to get any development going in the TeX world is awesomely depressing. leaving aside the truly impressive work done on macro packages, and the solid work on TeX distribution, what have we had in the last 10 years? well, we have eTeX, but i have never met anyone who could get excited about it (maybe I don't move in the right circles), and we have the endless talk about NTS, but that appears to be vapourous. then we have Omega, a marvellous thing which is let down by the apparent fact that its developers cannot work on it regularly. and lastly we have pdfTeX, which is the nearest thing to a runaway success that I at least have seen in TeX world. I think the world is voting with their feet, Tim Sebastian