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 f1J8d6101226 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 09:39:06 +0100 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f1J4Yrd25886 . for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:34:53 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C09A4F.6B51F100" 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 f1J4YqQ03626 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:34:52 +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 FAA05693 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:34:48 +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 f1J4YlQ03622 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:34:47 +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 <11.1B7F6D94@mail.listserv.gmd.de>; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 5:34:35 +0100 Received: from RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8b) with spool id 489293 for LATEX-L@RELAY.URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:34:41 +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 FAA13279 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:34:40 +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 FAA21010 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:34:40 +0100 Received: from csc.albany.edu (sarah.albany.edu [169.226.1.103]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f1J4Ydx09977 for ; Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:34:39 +0100 (MET) Received: from hilbert.math.albany.edu (hilbert.math.albany.edu [169.226.23.52]) by csc.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id XAA07826 for ; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 23:33:57 -0500 (EST) Received: (from hammond@localhost) by hilbert.math.albany.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA03808 for LATEX-L@URZ.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Sun, 18 Feb 2001 23:33:55 -0500 (EST) Return-Path: Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 05:33:55 +0100 Message-ID: <200102190433.XAA03808@hilbert.math.albany.edu> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "William F. Hammond" 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: 3980 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09A4F.6B51F100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sebastian Rahtz = writes: > 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 Is it even sensible to put anchors in DVI without having anchors supported there properly, i.e., apart from specials? -- Bill ------_=_NextPart_001_01C09A4F.6B51F100 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Multilingual Encodings Summary

Sebastian Rahtz = <sebastian.rahtz@COMPUTING-SERVICES.OXFORD.AC.UK> writes:

> 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

Is it even sensible to put anchors in DVI without = having anchors
supported there properly, i.e., apart from = specials?

          &nbs= p;            = ;            = -- Bill

------_=_NextPart_001_01C09A4F.6B51F100--