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 f7VB1G902639 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:01:16 +0200 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.4/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f7VB0wT21255 . for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:00:59 +0200 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 f7VB0wJ03420 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:00:58 +0200 (MET DST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C1320C.41526600" 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 NAA07154 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:00:57 +0200 (MEST) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by mailgate1.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f7VB0PG14407 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 13:00:56 +0200 (MET DST) X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f7VAseb10817; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:54:40 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from listserv (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.11.3/8.11.3/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) with ESMTP id f7VArro08539; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:53:53 +0200 Received: from LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 0691 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:53:52 +0200 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.11.3/8.11.3/SuSE Linux 8.11.1-0.5) with ESMTP id f7VArpo08533 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:53:51 +0200 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 f7VAsbb10801 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:54:37 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [195.20.224.219] (helo=mrvdom03.schlund.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 15clwU-00055M-00; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:54:30 +0200 Received: from manz-3e36501a.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.80.26] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom03.schlund.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 15clwS-0003Ez-01; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:54:29 +0200 Received: (from latex3@localhost) by istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de (8.9.3/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) id MAA10097; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 12:52:44 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: 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: Re: LaTeX3 and Omega Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2001 11:52:44 +0100 Message-ID: <15247.27772.447636.809305@istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: From: "Frank Mittelbach" Sender: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" To: Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4153 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1320C.41526600 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Javier, > I dream about that. Multilingual support for a dual TeX/Omega > LaTeX could be a mess to users and developpers. But I'm > just dreaming, since the LaTeX team has said in this list that > LaTeX3 will be a dual system. the "LaTeX team" hasn't said anything like this on this list. If you are refering to Robin's comments then please take them as Robin's comments, period. If it is not possible for project team members to voice their = opinion on something without it being viewed as CARVED IN CONCRETE AS PROJECT DIRECTIVES then there is no chance whatesoever to have any discussion on anything at all. > >> So, is it reasonable to assume that the LaTeX3 > >> will be actually an Omega format? my answer to this would be different: possibly or even likely, if certain criteria are met. Chris and I had a very fruitful and long session with Yannis and John = earlier this year about the possibibility of basing a LaTeX successor solemnly = on an Omega successor. Note the word "successor" being used twice. In my opinion there are many reasons why the current Omega is not = suitable but there are good possibilities to make it suitable. Whether this is = actually going to happen remains to be seen; John and Yannis intends to work extensively on the areas we identified as needing changes or additions. = Then there is also one very important aspect which is: stability and = maintenance --- not a very easy subject. > I think exactly the opposite -- Omega will give live to LaTeX while > "old" TeX will be a burden. i agree with you here, but only if Omega changes to a more "stable and = final" product, something which, for good reasons, it currently isn't. I really = hope that this is going to happen since IMHO Omega is the only successor of = TeX that has a good chance to replace it. Originally I had hoped to spend a good proportion of my time this year = and early next year on exactly this task, eg finalizing what I would expect = a frozen Omega successor to look like and to contain as features. = Unfortunately my wife got seriously ill and I don't expect to be able to do much on TeX/Omega/LaTeX for a longer period at all. So I don't know what's going = to happen, certainly not much if it depends on my doing it. frank ------_=_NextPart_001_01C1320C.41526600 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: LaTeX3 and Omega

Javier,

 > I dream about that. Multilingual support = for a dual TeX/Omega
 > LaTeX could be a mess to users and = developpers. But I'm
 > just dreaming, since the LaTeX team has = said in this list that
 > LaTeX3 will be a dual system.

the "LaTeX team" hasn't said anything like = this on this list. If you are
refering to Robin's comments then please take them as = Robin's comments,
period.  If it is not possible for project team = members to voice their opinion
on something without it being viewed as CARVED IN = CONCRETE AS PROJECT
DIRECTIVES then there is no chance whatesoever to = have any discussion on
anything at all.

 > >> So, is it reasonable to assume = that the LaTeX3
 > >> will be actually an Omega = format?

my answer to this would be different:

   possibly or even likely, if certain = criteria are met.

Chris and I had a very fruitful and long session with = Yannis and John earlier
this year about the possibibility of basing a LaTeX = successor solemnly on an
Omega successor. Note the word "successor" = being used twice.

In my opinion there are many reasons why the current = Omega is not suitable but
there are good possibilities to make it suitable. = Whether this is actually
going to happen remains to be seen; John and Yannis = intends to work
extensively on the areas we identified as needing = changes or additions. Then
there is also one very important aspect which is: = stability and maintenance
--- not a very easy subject.

 > I think exactly the opposite -- Omega will = give live to LaTeX while
 > "old" TeX will be a = burden.

i agree with you here, but only if Omega changes to a = more "stable and final"
product, something which, for good reasons, it = currently isn't. I really hope
that this is going to happen since IMHO Omega is the = only successor of TeX
that has a good chance to replace it.

Originally I had hoped to spend a good proportion of = my time this year and
early next year on exactly this task, eg finalizing = what I would expect a
frozen Omega successor to look like and to contain as = features. Unfortunately
my wife got seriously ill and I don't expect to be = able to do much on
TeX/Omega/LaTeX for a longer period at all. So I = don't know what's going to
happen, certainly not much if it depends on my doing = it.

frank

------_=_NextPart_001_01C1320C.41526600--