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 f7VJAY906605 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:10:34 +0200 Received: by webgate.proteosys.de (8.11.4/8.11.0) with ESMTP id f7VJAST23930 . for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:10:28 +0200 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 f7VJAOG23118 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:10:24 +0200 (MET DST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C13250.9C0DB100" 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 VAA19754 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:10:24 +0200 (MEST) Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by mailgate2.zdv.Uni-Mainz.DE (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id f7VJANJ12518 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:10:23 +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 f7VJ8cb22031; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:08:38 +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 f7VJ7oo11536; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:07:50 +0200 Received: from LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 1219 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:07:48 +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 f7VJ7mo11530 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:07:48 +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 f7VJ8Yb22019 for ; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:08:34 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from [195.20.224.204] (helo=mrvdom00.schlund.de) by moutvdom01.kundenserver.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 15cted-0007Y2-00 for LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:08:35 +0200 Received: from manz-3e3651e7.pool.mediaways.net ([62.54.81.231] helo=istrati.zdv.uni-mainz.de) by mrvdom00.schlund.de with esmtp (Exim 2.12 #2) id 15ctec-00005n-00 for LATEX-L@listserv.uni-heidelberg.de; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:08:34 +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 VAA11618; Fri, 31 Aug 2001 21:06:49 +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 20:06:49 +0100 Message-ID: <15247.57417.101750.851109@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: 4162 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C13250.9C0DB100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Apostolos Syropoulos writes: > Omega is definetely a step forward, but at the same time pdfTeX is a = step > forward. So I believe that the Omega team must consider incorporate > the ability to generate PDF files in future releases of the system. people are in disagreement about this. it is certainly true that it is a = major step forward now, but can it stay ahead or is the pdf quality it is = producing declining after a while? anyway, one of the points in our specs was to have a very very close = look into checking if incorporating pdftex features is the right way to go. and in case anybody wants to remark on eTeX .... yes that too had some = very important ideas either build or at least speced out (there are some = notes on etex/latex3 project meetings on our web site) and again there are a = number of items that we are arguing for inclusion into an Omega successor > PS And of course since I don't believe that a team of two people can > do all these things, I definetely believe that the team must be = expanded! i'm not so worried about that (the german saying "is too many cooks will = spoil the porridge") and i doubt that Omega would be where it is now had it = been built (or probably then rather not built) by a bigger team --- just look = at any other good programs around and you will find that typically there = are not many key people behind it originally. but i'm far more worried about the needed support afterwards if you want = it to be stable and used by millions --- TeX has that sort of for free as it = is virtually bug free but that will not be true for an Omega successor frank ------_=_NextPart_001_01C13250.9C0DB100 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: LaTeX3 and Omega

Apostolos Syropoulos writes:

 > Omega is definetely a step forward, but at = the same time pdfTeX is a step
 > forward. So I believe that the Omega team = must consider incorporate
 > the ability to generate PDF files in = future releases of the system.

people are in disagreement about this. it is certainly = true that it is a major
step forward now, but can it stay ahead or is the pdf = quality it is producing
declining after a while?

anyway, one of the points in our specs was to have a = very very close look into
checking if incorporating pdftex features is the = right way to go.

and in case anybody wants to remark on eTeX .... yes = that too had some very
important ideas either build or at least speced out = (there are some notes on
etex/latex3 project meetings on our web site) and = again there are a number of
items that we are arguing for inclusion into an  = Omega successor


 > PS And of course since I don't believe that = a team of two people can
 > do all these things, I definetely believe = that the team must be expanded!

i'm not so worried about that (the german saying = "is too many cooks will spoil
the porridge") and i doubt that Omega would be = where it is now had it been
built (or probably then rather not built) by a bigger = team --- just look at
any other good programs around and you will find that = typically there are not
many key people behind it originally.

but i'm far more worried about the needed support = afterwards if you want it to
be stable and used by millions --- TeX has that sort = of for free as it is
virtually bug free but that will not be true for an = Omega successor

frank

------_=_NextPart_001_01C13250.9C0DB100--