Re: jadetex test version 2.3

s.rahtz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx said:
> I'd appreciate some feedback from brave people who are not scared of
> JadeTeX, on version 2.3 at http://www.tug.org/applications/jadetex/
> jadetex.dtx 

Sounds like this one is not fit for 2.0 :-). 

OBTW: am I right in concluding that nTeX is preferrable above teTeX for 
SGMLtools, because a) it supports dynamic configuration values and b) it seems 
to be more actively maintained?


-- 
Cees de Groot               http://pobox.com/~cg          <cg@xxxxxxxxx>
                            http://www.sgmltools.org  <cg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--- We're hiring Java developers => www.acriter.com



 DSSSList info and archive:  http://www.mulberrytech.com/dsssl/dssslist

Current Thread
jadetex test version 2.3 Sebastian Rahtz - Mon, 19 Oct 1998 08:09:49 -0400 (EDT) Cees de Groot - Mon, 19 Oct 1998 14:18:06 -0400 (EDT) <= Message not available Mark Galassi - Mon, 19 Oct 1998 16:31:45 -0400 (EDT) Matt Gushee - Tue, 20 Oct 1998 01:33:22 -0400 (EDT) James H. Cloos Jr. - Tue, 20 Oct 1998 04:39:44 -0400 (EDT) Adam P. Harris - Tue, 20 Oct 1998 03:08:12 -0400 (EDT)

<- Previous	Index	Next ->
jadetex test version 2.3, Sebastian Rahtz	Thread	Re: jadetex test version 2.3, Mark Galassi
Large numeric code in refentry page, Thomas G. Lockhart	Date	Re: XML vers. CALS table, Norman Walsh
	Month

<-prev [Thread] next->	<-prev [Date] next->
Month Index \| List Home