LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Classic View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
From: Chris Rowley <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1998 19:32:56 +0100
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (25 lines)
Mark Steinberger wrote --

> It's important to be able to write in a language that
>    1. has macros

I am probably misunderstanding horribly but it seems that this is the major
thing you want.  Standard TeX notation may or may not be an excellent
language for this purpose but I am sure that using LaTeX simply to do
the macro expansion is not a good idea.

>    2. conveys the semantic information needed for the target language.

After expansion of the macros, I assume?

> Latex itself falls short of 2, but comes closer than anything else I
> know. Do you know a better alternative?

What typically is the "target labgauge"; and what might it be in the future?