LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project

LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Chris Rowley <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 29 Sep 2000 12:29:05 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
Sebastian is essentialy correct in his analysis of the history and
current status wrt the LaTeX kernel and required:

> I think its more fundamental than that, as discussed as far back as
> 1993 - hyperref does not fit into the model of LaTeX properly, and
> rides roigh-shod over LaTeX innards when it feels like it. To add it
> to "required" would imply that the kernel team felt that it reliably
> collaborated with kernel packages, which would simply be untrue.
>
> To do it right, bits of LaTeX need a rewrite, taking into account the
> needs of hyperref. This is what Context has done, of course,
> integrating the stuff into the kernel.
>

What we have not done yet, due to `stafff shortages', is any detailed
work on building the requirements of multi-use documents (via hyperef
or any other pakage) into the new experimental work that I am sure you
are all right now busily testing.


chris

ATOM RSS1 RSS2