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 f1J8dV101265 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:39:31 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1J0b5d25313 . for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:37:05 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09A4F.7A38A380" 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 f1J0b5Q28910 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:37:05 +0100 (MET) 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 BAA16909 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:37:04 +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 f1J0b4Q28906 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:37:04 +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 <1.E5F9A232@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 1:36:52 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 489252 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:36:57 +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 BAA12724 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:36:56 +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 BAA27268 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:36:56 +0100 Received: from oxmail.ox.ac.uk (oxmail1.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.1]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1J0aux17239 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:36:56 +0100 (MET) Received: from wing6.herald.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.0.230] ident=exim) by oxmail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #3) id 14UeJz-0005fb-00 for LATEX-L@urz.uni-heidelberg.de; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 00:36:55 +0000 Received: from httpd by wing6.herald.ox.ac.uk with local (Exim 2.02 #1) id 14UeJy-0003ts-00 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 00:36:54 +0000 Return-Path: X-Mailer: MIME-tools 4.103 (Entity 4.115) Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 01:36:54 +0100 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Sebastian Rahtz" 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: 3979 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09A4F.7A38A380 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In message <14991.58620.873169.562430@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> = Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project = writes: > is that technically very different from providing, say, color support = at dvi > level? i mean if i say \textcolor{red}{this text is in red} and my = text gets > broken across the line by TeX all that TeX does is providing some = \special at > the begin and end of this text (ie they fall onto two different > lines). Nevertheless dvips can color my text red. > > so why can't i let TeX split the link and nevertheless communicate via > \specials to, say dvips what the unbroken link would be? yes, you can, in theory. no problem. but over the last 4 or 5 years = no-one has actually come up with the code to do so. so either a) it *is* hard or b) no-one cares enough I suspect that most serious production users of hyperref uses pdftex = anyway, for other reasons. thats my personal experience, ie there is almost no reason for sticking with dvi + dvips.[1] but I have no solid evidence = that other people feel the same sebastian [1] yes, please spare me a) pstricks, b) bitmap fonts, c) existing EPS = files. none of them convince me enough not to switch to pdftex. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09A4F.7A38A380 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary

In message  = <14991.58620.873169.562430@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de>  &nb= sp;  Mailing list for the LaTeX3 = project           =    <LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE> writes:

> is that technically very different from = providing, say, color support at dvi
> level? i mean if i say \textcolor{red}{this text = is in red} and my text gets
> broken across the line by TeX all that TeX does = is providing some \special at
> the begin and end of this text (ie they fall = onto two different
> lines). Nevertheless dvips can color my text = red.
>
> so why can't i let TeX split the link and = nevertheless communicate via
> \specials to, say dvips what the unbroken link = would be?

yes, you can, in theory. no problem. but over the last = 4 or 5 years no-one has
actually come up with the code to do so. so = either
 a) it *is* hard
or
 b) no-one cares enough

I suspect that most serious production users of = hyperref uses pdftex anyway,
for other reasons. thats my personal experience, ie = there is almost no
reason for sticking with dvi + dvips.[1] but I have = no solid evidence that other
people feel the same

sebastian

[1] yes, please spare me a) pstricks, b) bitmap fonts, = c) existing EPS files.
none of them convince me enough not to switch to = pdftex.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C09A4F.7A38A380--