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/>