There are fundamental differences between countries in their approaches to typography. Germany has Duden. Although no one I met in Germany likes Duden, it's there, and you can't ignore it. And there is a DIN standard for letters (hence the dinbrief package). So Germany has a very *prescriptive* approach. The Chicago Manual of Style presents a prescriptive approach too. Our Australian `Style Manual' is mostly prescriptive, but (unlike the Chicago Manual of Style) it gives reasons for the choices. But the general trend seems to be away from prescriptive to *descriptive*. The new (1996) edition of Fowler's Modern English Usage (edited by Burchfield) is an excellent example of how this general principle is being worked out in practice. The original Fowler's was highly prescriptive and opinionated. The new edition is fair more `laid back', and although it does single out a number of errors, it is far more content to say that certain constructions are to be `avoided'. LaTeX is prescriptive - it gives you a format that is quite OK for most purposes. And most people don't want to change it (a mixture of ignorance and apathy?). Most of the questions I get asked are along the lines of `how do I do such-and-such to the chapter headings?' or `how do I put page numbers in such-and-such a place'. Often my answer is `you don't want to do that'. So I'm a little ambivalent about giving people more freedom to mess everything up. Giving people a `German format' seems a reasonable thing to do, but, as I pointed out, an `Australian format' wouldn't be used by anyone except the person who wrote it.