LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Lars Hellström <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Wed, 22 Jan 2003 16:00:21 +0100
text/plain (24 lines)
At 12.58 +0100 2003-01-22, David Kastrup wrote:
>Yes.  You guys crack me up.  The inputenc package is a vital part of
>LaTeX.  If it does not work well without eTeX and complains about this
>with an appropriate warning, that means that non-eTeX-2 should
>officially be declared deprecated with due warning time.
>My original proposal of doing such a declaration for the next LaTeX
>release was violently opposed.

An important difference between the suggestions is that you suggested that
LaTeX should have a built-in uselessness (that prevented running it on
non-e-TeX): you want to remove functionality. Certainly not before 2004,
but nonetheless uselessness. What Frank suggests is rather to point out
that an existing bug does go away if one uses e-TeX; this effectively adds
functionality. Having inputenc always scream about it is probably to overdo
it, but Frank seem to have in mind that enabling LICR objects for math
should be done using a separate package inpmath.

If one wants to convince people to use eTeX instead of TeX then I think a
carrot is better than a whip. Whipping tends to make people want to run

Lars Hellström