At 13:45 +0000 1998/11/27, Robin Fairbairns wrote:
>pdf isn't, it seems, good enough for mathematicians.  at least for one
>of them in this university ;-)
>
>in a thread about putting maths on the web (in an internal newsgroup)
>i've today been told that "converting whole documents to pdf is
>entirely the wrong idea".
>
>the imaging model is fine; there are those who don't think the
>hypertextual model is good enough, it seems.  who am i to gainsay
>them?  (i haven't been a `mathematician' since 1967, so i hardly
>count...)

When I mentioned it, I though wholly on the PDF imaging model, not as a
tool for authoring: One should use something with a more advanced parsing
than TeX's macro model, and use an imaging model at least as advanced as
that of PDF. In other words, PDF is a new DVI, not a new TeX.

  Hans Aberg
                  * Email: Hans Aberg <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
                  * Home Page: <http://www.matematik.su.se/~haberg/>
                  * AMS member listing: <http://www.ams.org/cml/>