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 f19KCwH05660 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:58 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f19KCwd19039 . for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:58 +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 f19KCvM08401 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:57 +0100 (MET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C092D4.B1CB8100" 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 VAA03857 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:57 +0100 (MET) 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 f19KCvM08395 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:57 +0100 (MET) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from mail.listserv.gmd.de (192.88.97.5) by mail.listserv.gmd.de (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.1a) with SMTP id <3.84246760@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:47 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 489130 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:49 +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 VAA27386 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:48 +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 VAA36398 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:49 +0100 Received: from venus.open.ac.uk (venus.open.ac.uk [137.108.143.2]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f19KCnu17860 for ; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:49 +0100 (MET) Received: from fell.open.ac.uk by venus.open.ac.uk via SMTP Local (Mailer 3.1) with ESMTP; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:12:43 +0000 Received: (from car2@localhost) by fell.open.ac.uk (8.9.3+Sun/8.9.1) id UAA18100; Fri, 9 Feb 2001 20:12:57 GMT In-Reply-To: <14980.6131.413948.678289@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> References: <01JZMVN1N7XK0009XR@ALPHA.NTP.SPRINGER.DE> <14979.1353.825196.318011@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> <14980.6131.413948.678289@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> Return-Path: X-Mailer: VM 6.76 under Emacs 20.7.1 X-Authentication-Warning: fell.open.ac.uk: car2 set sender to car2@fell.open.ac.uk using -f Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: inputenc text (and/or math) Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2001 21:12:56 +0100 Message-ID: <14980.20296.906943.559432@fell.open.ac.uk> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Chris Rowley" 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: 3786 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092D4.B1CB8100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Frank wrote -- > > I didn't explain clearly. What we have now is that > > > > (a) For people with GUI interface like Scientific Word, the = software has > > to deal with the ambiguity as best it can. > > and what I am saying is that they can't, really, deal with it. they = have to > provide a math markup and there is no way to identify something as = "this > should be math" automatically. so there is no real solution to the = problem > that people by mistake leave the needed markup out. YEs and in fact this applies to a lot of the clever stuff that SW does to help the author. It works 99% of the time ... magnificent for a Windows application:-). chris ------_=_NextPart_001_01C092D4.B1CB8100 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: inputenc text (and/or math)

Frank wrote --

>  > I didn't explain clearly. What we have = now is that
>  >
>  > (a) For people with GUI interface = like Scientific Word, the software has
>  > to deal with the ambiguity as best it = can.
>
> and what I am saying is that they can't, really, = deal with it. they have to
> provide a math markup and there is no way to = identify something as "this
> should be math" automatically. so there is = no real solution to the problem
> that people by mistake leave the needed markup = out.

YEs and in fact this applies to a lot of the clever = stuff that SW does
to help the author.  It works 99% of the time = ... magnificent for
a Windows application:-).


chris

------_=_NextPart_001_01C092D4.B1CB8100--