J.Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I've added a new slide (page 6)
> Achievements of LATEX (the first fifteen years)
damning by faint praise.
> By the way, when I pasted this title from the slide to this email, the
> two 'fi' ligatures were transferred as page breaks!
probably latex's fault.
> Here's the URL for the EuroTeX talk:
i agree (with whichever of my colleagues it was) about the odd nature of
your comparison of latex 3 with plain tex.
what is it you have against numeric arguments? i've never bothered
about it until the last weekend when i came across your complaints while
catching up with my mail.
> (Martin: Thank you for sending me off-list a definition for the XeTeX
> logo. I found it ugly (the strong symmetry I found distracting), so I
> commented it out of the source. I might change my mind about it
i don't like it either; i suggested to jonathan kew that it ought to be
possible to do better, but he reckons it's no more changeable than the
ghastly tex and latex logos.
> Further comments are welcome!
you might try spelling nicola's name right -- i read it as a masculine
name before i realised who you're talking about. the fact is that there
are myriad latex guides, tutorials and the like, on the web. that you
can only think of a couple that are missing is pretty remarkable, imo.
i must get back to my latex-leaning documentation work...
it would be nice to find people with the skills and the money to build
something as good as context-garden, for latex. beyond me, for sure :-(