Mixing
Is LaTeX3 ever going standalone or has this goal been abandoned?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I recall that earlier (over 10 years ago), producing a standalone compiler of LaTeX3 code was a project's goal. Today, this goal is no more articulated. Instead, the developers stress today that LaTeX is "not a stand-alone typesetting program". While there may be valid technical reasons for either decision, it is not my question here. My question is whether the goal of producing a standalone LaTeX3 compiler (which works independently of TeX/LaTeX2e) has been given up.
expl3 latex3 xparse
asked 2 hours ago
user49915
32414
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I recall that earlier (over 10 years ago), producing a standalone compiler of LaTeX3 code was a project's goal. Today, this goal is no more articulated. Instead, the developers stress today that LaTeX is "not a stand-alone typesetting program". While there may be valid technical reasons for either decision, it is not my question here. My question is whether the goal of producing a standalone LaTeX3 compiler (which works independently of TeX/LaTeX2e) has been given up.
expl3 latex3 xparse
asked 2 hours ago
user49915
32414
As far as I remember LaTeX3 was never intended to replace an engine (compiler) but only to be the successor of the LaTeX2e format. The developers still try to achieve the latter, i.e. producing a sensible "API" and when that is ready there shall be a format.
– TeXnician
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
up vote
2
down vote
favorite
I recall that earlier (over 10 years ago), producing a standalone compiler of LaTeX3 code was a project's goal. Today, this goal is no more articulated. Instead, the developers stress today that LaTeX is "not a stand-alone typesetting program". While there may be valid technical reasons for either decision, it is not my question here. My question is whether the goal of producing a standalone LaTeX3 compiler (which works independently of TeX/LaTeX2e) has been given up.
expl3 latex3 xparse
asked 2 hours ago
user49915
32414
I recall that earlier (over 10 years ago), producing a standalone compiler of LaTeX3 code was a project's goal. Today, this goal is no more articulated. Instead, the developers stress today that LaTeX is "not a stand-alone typesetting program". While there may be valid technical reasons for either decision, it is not my question here. My question is whether the goal of producing a standalone LaTeX3 compiler (which works independently of TeX/LaTeX2e) has been given up.
expl3 latex3 xparse
expl3 latex3 xparse
asked 2 hours ago
user49915
32414
asked 2 hours ago
user49915
32414
asked 2 hours ago
user49915
32414
asked 2 hours ago
user49915
32414
asked 2 hours ago
user49915
32414
32414
As far as I remember LaTeX3 was never intended to replace an engine (compiler) but only to be the successor of the LaTeX2e format. The developers still try to achieve the latter, i.e. producing a sensible "API" and when that is ready there shall be a format.
– TeXnician
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
As far as I remember LaTeX3 was never intended to replace an engine (compiler) but only to be the successor of the LaTeX2e format. The developers still try to achieve the latter, i.e. producing a sensible "API" and when that is ready there shall be a format.
– TeXnician
1 hour ago
As far as I remember LaTeX3 was never intended to replace an engine (compiler) but only to be the successor of the LaTeX2e format. The developers still try to achieve the latter, i.e. producing a sensible "API" and when that is ready there shall be a format.
– TeXnician
1 hour ago
As far as I remember LaTeX3 was never intended to replace an engine (compiler) but only to be the successor of the LaTeX2e format. The developers still try to achieve the latter, i.e. producing a sensible "API" and when that is ready there shall be a format.
– TeXnician
1 hour ago
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
The LaTeX team are macro programmers, and the aim of LaTeX3 work has therefore always been in the form either of packages or a stand-alone TeX format. Work over many years suggests that to delivery for users today, creating code which is loadable as LaTeX2e packages is most productive. That does not mean a new format is ruled out. However, a lot of materials was is likely to be added in package mode first. For example, we are currently working on tagged PDF: this needs to work now, and thus has to integrate into LaTeX2e.
It is probably more likely/easy for the team to provide 'tools' (binaries or scripts) than was the case in the past: see for example l3build. That stems from the availability of Lua in all modern TeX systems as a scripting set up.
answered 1 hour ago
Joseph Wright♦
198k21545866
add a comment |Â
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
5
down vote
The LaTeX team are macro programmers, and the aim of LaTeX3 work has therefore always been in the form either of packages or a stand-alone TeX format. Work over many years suggests that to delivery for users today, creating code which is loadable as LaTeX2e packages is most productive. That does not mean a new format is ruled out. However, a lot of materials was is likely to be added in package mode first. For example, we are currently working on tagged PDF: this needs to work now, and thus has to integrate into LaTeX2e.
It is probably more likely/easy for the team to provide 'tools' (binaries or scripts) than was the case in the past: see for example l3build. That stems from the availability of Lua in all modern TeX systems as a scripting set up.
answered 1 hour ago
Joseph Wright♦
198k21545866
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
The LaTeX team are macro programmers, and the aim of LaTeX3 work has therefore always been in the form either of packages or a stand-alone TeX format. Work over many years suggests that to delivery for users today, creating code which is loadable as LaTeX2e packages is most productive. That does not mean a new format is ruled out. However, a lot of materials was is likely to be added in package mode first. For example, we are currently working on tagged PDF: this needs to work now, and thus has to integrate into LaTeX2e.
It is probably more likely/easy for the team to provide 'tools' (binaries or scripts) than was the case in the past: see for example l3build. That stems from the availability of Lua in all modern TeX systems as a scripting set up.
answered 1 hour ago
Joseph Wright♦
198k21545866
add a comment |Â
up vote
5
down vote
up vote
5
down vote
The LaTeX team are macro programmers, and the aim of LaTeX3 work has therefore always been in the form either of packages or a stand-alone TeX format. Work over many years suggests that to delivery for users today, creating code which is loadable as LaTeX2e packages is most productive. That does not mean a new format is ruled out. However, a lot of materials was is likely to be added in package mode first. For example, we are currently working on tagged PDF: this needs to work now, and thus has to integrate into LaTeX2e.
It is probably more likely/easy for the team to provide 'tools' (binaries or scripts) than was the case in the past: see for example l3build. That stems from the availability of Lua in all modern TeX systems as a scripting set up.
answered 1 hour ago
Joseph Wright♦
198k21545866
The LaTeX team are macro programmers, and the aim of LaTeX3 work has therefore always been in the form either of packages or a stand-alone TeX format. Work over many years suggests that to delivery for users today, creating code which is loadable as LaTeX2e packages is most productive. That does not mean a new format is ruled out. However, a lot of materials was is likely to be added in package mode first. For example, we are currently working on tagged PDF: this needs to work now, and thus has to integrate into LaTeX2e.
It is probably more likely/easy for the team to provide 'tools' (binaries or scripts) than was the case in the past: see for example l3build. That stems from the availability of Lua in all modern TeX systems as a scripting set up.
answered 1 hour ago
Joseph Wright♦
198k21545866
edited 1 hour ago
answered 1 hour ago
Joseph Wright♦
198k21545866
answered 1 hour ago
Joseph Wright♦
198k21545866
answered 1 hour ago
Joseph Wright♦
198k21545866
198k21545866
add a comment |Â
add a comment |Â
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2ftex.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f455424%2fis-latex3-ever-going-standalone-or-has-this-goal-been-abandoned%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
As far as I remember LaTeX3 was never intended to replace an engine (compiler) but only to be the successor of the LaTeX2e format. The developers still try to achieve the latter, i.e. producing a sensible "API" and when that is ready there shall be a format.
– TeXnician
1 hour ago