Received: from webgate.proteosys.de (mail.proteosys-ag.com [62.225.9.49]) by lucy.proteosys (8.11.0/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id f0TKaj709194 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:45 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f0TKbV723850 . for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:37:31 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TKai723603 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:44 +0100 (MET) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C08A33.31CF2C80" Received: from mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.57]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id VAA24664 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:44 +0100 (MET) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (mail.listserv.gmd.de [192.88.97.5]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TKai723599 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:44 +0100 (MET) Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <15.078EB0B3@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:40 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 484947 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:40 +0100 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id VAA12860 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:39 +0100 (MET) Received: from moutvdom01.kundenserver.de (moutvdom01.kundenserver.de [195.20.224.200]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f0TKadY07738 for ; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:39 +0100 (MET) Received: from [195.20.224.219] (helo=mrvdom03.kundenserver.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NL2P-0000pd-00 for LATEX-L@relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:33 +0100 Received: from manz-3e3645ad.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.69.173] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom03.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 14NL2P-0004eU-00 for LATEX-L@relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:36:33 +0100 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id VAA23994; Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:22:56 +0100 Return-Path: X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under Emacs 20.4.1 X-Authentication-Warning: istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de: latex3 set sender to frank@mittelbach-online.de using -f Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: default font encoding Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 21:22:55 +0100 Message-ID: <14965.53535.903052.219374@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Frank Mittelbach" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: "Multiple recipients of list LATEX-L" Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 3659 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C08A33.31CF2C80 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable we have publically announced often enough that the core of 2e is = essentially frozen except for serious bug fixes and new development should happen at package level --- all this because of compatibility making sure that = documents do work identically (as far as possible) from one maintenence release to = the next, and i still think this is the right decision. i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the default font = encoding from OT1 to T1 so that more people get proper hyphenation without the = need to say \usepackage[T1]{fontenc} in their documents and would be interested to hear what the opinion on = this list would be (not that i consider this list a representative sample of = the average LaTeX user). opinions? frank ------_=_NextPart_001_01C08A33.31CF2C80 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable default font encoding

we have publically announced often enough that the = core of 2e is essentially
frozen except for serious bug fixes and new = development should happen at
package level --- all this because of compatibility = making sure that documents
do work identically (as far as possible) from one = maintenence release to the
next, and i still think this is the right = decision.

i nevertheless begin to wonder if we should change the = default font encoding
from OT1 to T1 so that more people get proper = hyphenation without the need to
say

  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}

in their documents and would be interested to hear = what the opinion on this
list would be (not that i consider this list a = representative sample of the
average LaTeX user).

opinions?

frank

------_=_NextPart_001_01C08A33.31CF2C80--