X-VM-v5-Data: ([nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil nil] ["1211" "Fri" "18" "December" "1998" "18:15:31" "+0100" "Hans Aberg" "haberg@MATEMATIK.SU.SE" nil "25" "Re: pointless discussions" "^Date:" nil nil "12" nil nil nil nil nil] nil) Received: from kralle.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (kralle.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.158]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA09740; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:33:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from listserv.gmd.de (listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.1]) by kralle.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id SAA24367; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:33:47 +0100 (MET) Received: from lsv1.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.2) by listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <10.848ACACB@listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:20:13 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 413930 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:16:15 +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 SAA21923 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:16:02 +0100 (MET) Received: from [130.237.37.136] (sl43.modempool.kth.se [130.237.37.63]) by mail0.nada.kth.se (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA15292 for ; Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:15:59 +0100 (MET) X-Sender: su95-hab@mail.nada.kth.se References: <199812181333.NAA25766@nag.co.uk> <199812181333.NAA25766@nag.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Message-ID: Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project In-Reply-To: <199812181610.RAA11630@mozart.ujf-grenoble.fr> Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:15:31 +0100 From: Hans Aberg Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project To: Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L Subject: Re: pointless discussions Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3202 At 17:10 +0100 1998/12/18, Thierry Bouche wrote: >It France it is even illegal, because of obscure privacy concerns... If it applies to email, which is a crossing between normal conversation and regular mail. I think also that the this a principle of what one might expect: If it is normal in some circuit to forward regular mail in France, then if that was brought to court, the might be judged to be legal. >The discussion about the interest in PDF related to its being more or >less commercial is completely stupid. Maybe is it time not only to go >private but simply to stop it! As far as me, I had the intention stop before David Carlisle interfered with his "pointless discussions". I think though that the fact that PDF is a commercial product makes it a bad idea to make it a new DVI for TeX. However, a new extended DVI for TeX could be used to convert, perhaps even automatically to PDF. This way one would get away from the commercial concerns governing the development of PDF. Hans Aberg * Email: Hans Aberg * Home Page: * AMS member listing: