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:
Javier Bezos <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 21 Jan 2009 15:07:03 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines)
> > I actually before emailing the LaTeX list, researched a lot and talked 
> > to
> > different people and we all believe that we should have a separate 
> > format of
> > LaTeX at least in 2e version.
>
> it will be interesting to understand the rationale behind this. I'm not 
> saying
> you're wrong, it is just that I don't see a spinoff giving you any
> additional benefits these days. Reasons in the past have been things like
> preloaded fonts and those shouldn't apply  today I would think.

There could be a reason, yet: \documentclass. From other posts,
I think what Vafa wants is to write the whole document using the
Arabic script, including macro names. That's sensible, because
mixing LtoR markup with RtoL text can be a mess and this can be
only accomplished (to some extent) with a format.

Javier 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2