Received: from mail.proteosys.com ([62.225.9.49]) by nummer-3.proteosys with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.5329); Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:58:28 +0100 Received: by mail.proteosys.com (8.12.2/8.12.2) with ESMTP id h06CwQ6C012523 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:58:27 +0100 Received: from listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h06Ck1EV007128; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:46:01 +0100 (MET) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2B583.4E5F3200" Received: from listserv (listserv.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.27]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.2/8.12.2/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h064ACZC008642; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:39:32 +0100 Received: from LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE by LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8d) with spool id 5241 for LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:39:32 +0100 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Received: from relay.uni-heidelberg.de (relay.uni-heidelberg.de [129.206.100.212]) by listserv.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.2/8.12.2/SuSE Linux 0.6) with ESMTP id h06CTWTk010865 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:29:32 +0100 Received: from mailout09.sul.t-online.com (mailout09.sul.t-online.com [194.25.134.84]) by relay.uni-heidelberg.de (8.12.4/8.12.4) with ESMTP id h06CZxEV005907 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:35:59 +0100 (MET) Received: from fwd06.sul.t-online.de by mailout09.sul.t-online.com with smtp id 18VWU2-0006US-0E; Mon, 06 Jan 2003 13:35:58 +0100 Received: from localhost.localdomain (520018396234-0001@[217.80.157.144]) by fmrl06.sul.t-online.com with esmtp id 18VWTq-0tCynYC; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:35:46 +0100 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h06CZiEp018856 for ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:35:44 +0100 Received: (from dak@localhost) by localhost.localdomain (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id h06CZiG9018852; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:35:44 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20030106130656259998.GyazMail.jbezos@wanadoo.es> Lines: 60 References: <15897.10031.19948.331055@cs.anu.edu.au> <20030106130656259998.GyazMail.jbezos@wanadoo.es> Return-Path: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 Jan 2003 12:58:28.0887 (UTC) FILETIME=[4EE68A70:01C2B583] X-Sender: 520018396234-0001@t-dialin.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.28 (www . roaringpenguin . com / mimedefang) X-Spam-Score: -2.8 () IN_REP_TO,QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,REFERENCES,SPAM_PHRASE_00_01,USER_AGENT,USER_AGENT_GNUS_UA Content-class: urn:content-classes:message Subject: Re: Proposed change of policy Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 13:35:43 +0100 Message-ID: A X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Re: Proposed change of policy Thread-Index: AcK1g08C+Fgyg/aiSWGZpigU7Gr6BQ== From: "David Kastrup" To: Reply-To: "Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project" Status: R X-Status: X-Keywords: X-UID: 4397 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2B583.4E5F3200 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Javier Bezos writes: > David: > > >> But the question then arises: why e-TeX? Why not Omega, an > >> e-TeX/Omega hybrid, . . . ? > > > > Because functionality present in e-TeX is desperately needed for > > implementing more versatile output routines than the present, was > > explicitly requested by LaTeX project team members and implemented > > for their sake. > > The functionality present in Omega is needed for some > critical tasks (at least, I need them more desperately than > those in e-TeX). The stress is here "some". And John Plaice has already said that if e-TeX's extensions were needed, they would get implemented in Omega. And they are needed. One can't design usefully flexible output routines without some of the stuff. At least not with very serious drawbacks and slowdowns. And the register limitations of the standard TeX engine are insane for any serious programming. I am talking about a policy change for the _next_ release of LaTeX2e, not some hazy target far in the LaTeX3 future. There is no reason not to be using e-TeX instead of TeX for LaTeX2e per default. There is a host of reasons not to use Omega at the present time. > > In contrast, Omega is a moving target and widely undocumented. > > The features specific to Omega are rather orthogonal to most of > > the problems the LaTeX3 project is tackling. > > I cannot speak for the LaTeX3 team, but I don's think > so. Integrating LaTeX with Unicode, XML, SVG and multilingual > environments should be one of the current goals of LaTeX. It does not touch most of the work that is ongoing with LaTeX3 at the moment. And much of it can be implemented without change to the current LaTeX3 work, anyhow. At the danger of repeating myself: if LaTeX3 is going to cater for everything under the sun, and work on it must not progress unless it does so, LaTeX3 will be dead. > While it's true Omega is undocumented and its developement somewhat > "arcane", I don't see another possibility. Whether there will be a time when Omega is the engine of choice for LaTeX3 or LaTeX4, will remain to be seen. But e-TeX is here _now_ and LaTeX development needs to commence _now_. What use will it be for Omega when it gets finished sometime, and there is only an ancient code base to start work on? One can't program everything at once when Omega is there. There is work that needs to progress _now_. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2B583.4E5F3200 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Re: Proposed change of policy

        Javier = Bezos <jbezos@WANADOO.ES> writes:

> David:
>
> >> But the question then arises:  why = e-TeX?  Why not Omega, an
> >> e-TeX/Omega hybrid, . . . ?
> >
> > Because functionality present in e-TeX is = desperately needed for
> > implementing more versatile output routines = than the present, was
> > explicitly requested by LaTeX project team = members and implemented
> > for their sake.
>
> The functionality present in Omega is needed for = some
> critical tasks (at least, I need them more = desperately than
> those in e-TeX).

The stress is here "some".  And John = Plaice has already said that if
e-TeX's extensions were needed, they would get = implemented in Omega.
And they are needed.  One can't design usefully = flexible output
routines without some of the stuff.  At least = not with very serious
drawbacks and slowdowns.  And the register = limitations of the
standard TeX engine are insane for any serious = programming.

I am talking about a policy change for the _next_ = release of LaTeX2e,
not some hazy target far in the LaTeX3 future.

There is no reason not to be using e-TeX instead of = TeX for LaTeX2e
per default.  There is a host of reasons not to = use Omega at the
present time.

> > In contrast, Omega is a moving target and = widely undocumented.
> > The features specific to Omega are rather = orthogonal to most of
> > the problems the LaTeX3 project is = tackling.
>
> I cannot speak for the LaTeX3 team, but I don's = think
> so. Integrating LaTeX with Unicode, XML, SVG and = multilingual
> environments should be one of the current goals = of LaTeX.

It does not touch most of the work that is ongoing = with LaTeX3 at the
moment.  And much of it can be implemented = without change to the
current LaTeX3 work, anyhow.

At the danger of repeating myself: if LaTeX3 is going = to cater for
everything under the sun, and work on it must not = progress unless it
does so, LaTeX3 will be dead.

> While it's true Omega is undocumented and its = developement somewhat
> "arcane", I don't see another = possibility.

Whether there will be a time when Omega is the engine = of choice for
LaTeX3 or LaTeX4, will remain to be seen.  But = e-TeX is here _now_
and LaTeX development needs to commence _now_.

What use will it be for Omega when it gets finished = sometime, and
there is only an ancient code base to start work = on?  One can't
program everything at once when Omega is there.  = There is work that
needs to progress _now_.

--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2B583.4E5F3200--