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 f19CtHH03554 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:17 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f19CtHd17595 . for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:17 +0100 Received: from mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailserver1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.30]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f19CtBM01381 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:16 +0100 (MET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09297.8D04E880" Received: from mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE [134.93.8.56]) by mail.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA02181 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:11 +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 mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f19CtAM01377 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:10 +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 <3.5E3F98FD@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:04 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 488104 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:08 +0100 Received: from ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (mail.urz.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.119.234]) by relay.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA16645 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:07 +0100 (MET) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by ix.urz.uni-heidelberg.de (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id NAA32314 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:06 +0100 Received: from zambeze.ujf-grenoble.fr (zambeze.ujf-grenoble.fr [152.77.2.3]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f19Ct6u22566 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:06 +0100 (MET) Received: from mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr (mozart.ujf-grenoble.fr [193.54.241.5]) by zambeze.ujf-grenoble.fr (Pro-8.9.3/8.9.3/Configured by AD & JE 25/10/1999) with ESMTP id NAA15205 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:05 +0100 (MET) Received: (from bouche@localhost) by mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr (8.9.3/8.8.5) id NAA16290; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:04 +0100 (MET) In-Reply-To: <200102091336.NAA06041@stats.math.u-psud.fr> References: <200102091336.NAA06041@stats.math.u-psud.fr> Return-Path: X-Mailer: VM 6.22 under 19.15 XEmacs Lucid Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: MLTeX vs AE virtual fonts Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 13:55:04 +0100 Message-ID: <200102091255.NAA16290@mozart.ujf-grenoble.Fr> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Thierry Bouche" 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: 3771 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09297.8D04E880 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable =BB There is no electronic document format that is overall better re =BB compactness, usability, and long term stability. re usability, you're kidding, aren't you? BTW, I think Knuth made quite clear what DVI is. TeX macros are first dealt in TeX's mouth, then stomach, where do you think DVI emerge from? Thierry Bouche ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09297.8D04E880 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: MLTeX vs AE virtual fonts

=BB There is no electronic document format that is = overall better re
=BB compactness, usability, and long term = stability.

re usability, you're kidding, aren't you?

BTW, I think Knuth made quite clear what DVI is. TeX = macros are first
dealt in TeX's mouth, then stomach, where do you = think DVI emerge
from?

Thierry Bouche

------_=_NextPart_001_01C09297.8D04E880--