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:
Hans Aberg <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 25 Jun 1997 11:59:07 +0200
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (25 lines)
Marcel Oliver <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>If you look at these classes, they point to some problem which will
>grow in the future: The standard LaTeX classes have a rather
>restricted set of front matter commands.  So every publisher is
>extending them in mutually incompatible ways.
>
>The AMS classes have reversed the order of abstract and \maketitle
>with good reason, I believe, and there is a case that this should be
>the default behaviour for all classes.
...
>In any case, there is definitely the need for a standard.  I would
>like to be able to just change the document class to reformat my
>documents in a different style without having to do trivial but
>annoying changes to the front matter.  Also, when I start writing an
>article, I don't necessarily know where it will be published.  Thus it
>is practically useful to have a front matter standard that all
>publishers could agree to and comply with.

  Such things could be achieved by a suitable form of object orientation,
or developing modules, which spread out the code horizontally rather than
vertically.

  Hans Aberg

ATOM RSS1 RSS2