X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1556" "Thu" "17" "December" "1998" "19:48:16" "-0500" "Y&Y, Inc." "support@YANDY.COM" nil "36" "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 BAA16711; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 01:49:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.2) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <3.26D85063@listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 1:49:45 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 413067 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 01:49:19 +0100 Received: from mail-out-0.tiac.net (mail-out-0.tiac.net [199.0.65.247]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id BAA19972 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 01:48:44 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail-out-2.tiac.net (mail-out-2.tiac.net [199.0.65.13]) by mail-out-0.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA15554 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 19:48:25 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from support@YandY.com) Received: from DENALI (p95.tc5.metro.MA.tiac.com [209.61.76.96]) by mail-out-2.tiac.net (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA28563 for ; Thu, 17 Dec 1998 14:49:31 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from support@YandY.com) X-Sender: yandy@pop.tiac.net X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: <4.1.19981217194302.01f2e270@pop.tiac.net> Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: <199812172229.RAA20657@hilbert.math.albany.edu> Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 19:48:16 -0500 From: "Y&Y, Inc." 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: 3196 Hi: At 05:29 PM 98/12/17 , William F. Hammond wrote: >If one construes the "level" of a format as its position in the >(pseudo) directed graph (not a tree) of all possible formats, where >the "arrows" between vertices represent "faithful" translations, then >dvi format is a higher level format than either postscript or pdf. Well in that case lets just stay with TeX source code :-) It is even `higher level' in your hierarchy. >As far as I know, dvi is a higher level format than either of the >Adobe formats. Moreover, writing "dvi" is not taxed in any way. That >said, dvi viewing is just not very well distributed. That's too bad, >because I find "xdvi", when suited to the task, much more pleasant to >use than any pdf or postscript reader that I have seen. (But isn't Except: DVI is not a good format when you have figures, or when you use fonts other than the CM fonts, or when you use any \specials, or in other words if you do anything but the lowest common denominator types of TeX-world things... >Perhaps if some of the dvi specials now in mainstream use were adopted >officially, those who code dvi viewers would have more incentive to >add features. There was the `DVI standards' committee. It refused to address the real issues including \special{...} at a point where it might actually have made some difference. Hence lost a great chance to prevent a huge mess. (They did however discuss how many angels can fit into one scaled point). Regards, Berthold. Y&Y, Inc. http://www.YandY.com/news.htm mailto:support@YandY.com