On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 6:45 PM Jon Forrest wrote: > I know of > a full C reimplementation that passes the test but the author doesn't > want to make it free software. > Although it is possible, I find this hard to believe. I can't imagine spending as much time as would be required to duplicate something that already exists. > > There are other rewrites out there that could be candidates but someone > will enough power will have to proclaim one as the official TeX > alternative. > Again, hard to believe. > > > 2. Drop DVI? Are you kidding me? Although PDF may be popular now, > > that may not be the case 20 years from now. A device-independent > > format is what is needed, and that's what DVI is. TeX is guaranteed > > to produce the exact same output 100 years from now. > > And .PDF isn't? > No. It isn't. It is an Adobe product. > > .DVI was great until .PDF matured. .DVI has almost no penetration > these days, whereas .PDF is everywhere. DVI was never meant to have any penetration. It was always intended to be an intermediary format. > I'm not saying that .PDF > will always be the proper alternative but a properly rewritten TeX > should make it much easier to replace .PDF will whatever comes > next. > Again, given the complexity of a proper TeX, and its declining popularity, I find it ver hard to believe that someone would spend the time to duplicate, with enhancements, it. Blake McBride