> 2.09 but prohibits the use of private macros (even if defined in the
> preamble with no name clashes, redefinitions etc of standard commands or
> ones from the special journal .cls), presumably because this is a
> hindrance in conversion to HTML (which has the advantage of being
> searchable) which they use as one of their online formats.
> Is this something one must be prepared to accept in the long run? It
no. it just means they don't use a very sophisticated converter. i have
mildly strong views on this, since my job at present is further
development of Elsevier's latex 2 sgml. If we go to the trouble of
dealing with arbitrary macros, so can everyone else....
[if you have not heard of it before, our converter works by running LaTeX
with a highly-specialized LaTeX class, and extracting tagged text from
the dvi file. Eitan Gurari's tex4ht uses a similar process.]