LATEX-L Archives

Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project


Options: Use Classic View

Use Proportional Font
Show HTML 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: Wed, 18 Jun 1997 18:16:18 +0200
In-Reply-To: <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: Mailing list for the LaTeX3 project <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments: text/plain (24 lines)
Sebastian Rahtz wrote --

>  > But is it as useful to the research physicists?  (I have no idea.)
> if their stuff gets in there, yes; Science Direct is as good or better
> than xxx, isnt it?

Ask a physicist (there's enough of them around the TeX world:-).

And remind me how I access Science Direct so that I can check it out.

>  > In what units: are Elsevier prepared to reveal their data on such things?
> well, we publish (say) 1200 journals, at (say) an average of 50
> articles a year, so say 6000 articles a year? 10000? is that a lot?

Not necessarily, if it is over a wide area of science.

This is getting a bit off subject for this list (my fault): althogh I
would recommend people to look at eg to see "TeX in Action".