## LATEX-L@LISTSERV.UNI-HEIDELBERG.DE

 Options: Use Classic View Use Proportional Font Show Text Part by Default Show All Mail Headers Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

 Re: LaTeX journal and publisher macros Robin Fairbairns <[log in to unmask]> Tue, 14 Oct 1997 13:55:10 +0100 text/plain (44 lines) ```Hans Aberg writes: > The correct way to understand if various object oriented techniques and > such are the right things, is to make a research prototype and then > experiment with that: Such techniques are otherwise difficult to > understand. What I said was, that Hans's proposal was interesting but that I hadn't concluded that it was the `right way forward'. I meant exactly what I said: I didn't mean I didn't understand it. I'm attracted by the constructs that David Carlisle produced in his frontmatter proposal, which addresses the problem in a slightly different way. David's proposal wins (IMHO) if we're not likely to run out of name space. If we are likely to run out of name space, Hans's proposal (which I would identify with   @InCollection{saltzer:names,   author = "Saltzer, J. H.",   title = "Naming and {B}inding of {O}bjects\nocite{bayer:os-advanced}",   crossref = "bayer:os-advanced",   chapter = "3.A",   pages = "100--208"   }   @Book{bayer:os-advanced,   title = "Operating Systems: an Advanced Course",   publisher = "Springer-Verlag",   year = 1979,   editor = "Bayer, R. and Graham, R. M. and Seegmuller, G.",   volume = 60,   series = "LNCS"   } which is the classic naming paper) comes into its own. There is no problem in my mind with implementing Hans's suggestion (though I would be interested to see his implementation). There is a problem with knowing whether it's necessary. I believe it imposes an extra burden of understanding on the user (and hence of documentation on the implementor), so I don't want to rush into its use without being entirely sure that it's the right thing. Robin ```