References: <CAM2dePV5k2+Q+H=jCj=bsvc-hWanc3_CLYw1-ukhB8UMhzU_Lw@mail.gmail.com> <51C94FA0.1080803@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CAM2dePUfzF_Bj5QX7qbAmsyO7Udjy1yb5j43zTVexOwG2rmtVQ@mail.gmail.com> <51DD0EBD.6080308@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CAM2dePUxFs1eNU1iTCrnp=CbDFo1eMjE813gZQH3vVhBkH=zDg@mail.gmail.com> <51DF2000.30703@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CAM2dePW67rUcSRqRYEeccS6AUVmGjW5XuY74ZCYPfgqObK=BcA@mail.gmail.com> <51E12031.4060600@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CAM2dePUp90ehRiipJF+mHVZUYksVbrbP7gKS=zJvdJyCD8JSjQ@mail.gmail.com> <51E2FFC0.6010209@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <CAM2dePVY9XSqG4W4VbP6V4mrO5_67t7=VfGnENrdcpz5NsVyig@mail.gmail.com> <51E5AD8C.1020405@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <loom.20130717T201125-747@post.gmane.org>
            <51E7A12D.7040700@morningstar2.co.uk>
            <A4957F2D-FEF8-47AE-9FD2-2E8511CBA451@yahoo.co.uk>
            <82B9B5F8-C048-4ADD-9D50-A77AD1BEAE15@mittelbach-online.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID:  <538BFD5A-077B-46B0-8B79-2E1CB0AEC4BF@yahoo.co.uk>
Date:         Thu, 18 Jul 2013 19:50:28 +0100
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project
              <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE>
From: Chris Rowley <ca_rowley@YAHOO.CO.UK>
Subject: Re: Time for \UseExplPackage? (Was re: l3keys feature request)
To: LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE
In-Reply-To:  <82B9B5F8-C048-4ADD-9D50-A77AD1BEAE15@mittelbach-online.de>
Precedence: list
Envelope-To: <rainer.schoepf@GMX.NET>
Status: R

More economical but only by a by then unnoticeable amount, as you say.  It is only the thought that ordinary users may have to change to a system that looks in any sense different (within the next 20 years or so) that frightens the millions, and their support staff: thus use of such language would perhaps be best avoided?

Comments from others please.

Chris

Sent from a bar . . . maybe an iBar.

On 18 Jul 2013, at 18:45, iPad Mittelbach <ipad@MITTELBACH-ONLINE.DE> wrote:

> I can't see anything worrying in that statement. What has developed so far for L3 nicely enough runs on top of a 2e format but the more it becomes complete the more will be the  two centuries of plain TeX + LaTeX 2.09 + 2e code in the current format become a burden.
> 
> And as a result there may be a point when it will be more economical to drop that format (and perhaps support certain 2e code as a package).
> 
> Whether the new thing is then a format in the old sense or something that is loaded (like it is now into 2e) remains to be seen. So in that sense it might be not a "format" because these days the loading part is not really taking that long any more.
> 
> Frank
> 
> ... written on the iPad but not from an iBar
> 
> Am 18.07.2013 um 16:56 schrieb Chris Rowley <ca_rowley@YAHOO.CO.UK>:
> 
>> Joseph
>> 
>>>> Until we actually have the basics of a new format, 
>> 
>> A new format???
>> 
>> That sounds worrying as I am passing the message to the million+ everyday users of LaTeX that there will never again be a need for different 'formats' with all its technical and sociological problems, primarily because they are handy only for last century's technology levels.
>> 
>> So I hope we can have a consistent message on this.
>> 
>> Chris
>> 
>> 
>> PSent from a bar . . . maybe an iBar.
>>