C Y <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: ... >> It [breqn] can't be perfect, but it does seem to work pretty well in >> most cases. I haven't heard of anyone working on it since >> Michael Downes; too bad. > > I don't think anyone wants to work on it until the license is cleared > up, even assuming we've got people both interested and that skilled in > TeX.
I was hoping someone at AMS would do some more work on it. > If need be presumably we can implement the ideas in our own > axiom.breakequations.sty file, but that will be very, very > nontrivial :-/. I suspect if we pushed the AMS hard enough, we could get breqn under a fairly liberal license. >> > I hope Axiom will be able to build off of the general ideas >> > there to make an Axiom specific EAxiom environment someday >> > (clearly pamphlet files add an extra dimension, and the IO >> > issues involved are also a bit tricky). >> >> I said I'd have some sort of EAxiom to send you a while ago; >> obviously I don't. Sorry! > > No worries - I'm rather behind myself. I'm still writing the text for > the unit package, and have a ways to go even on that. (Arrrrgh. > Must... finish... units... and... move... on... to errors...) Speaking of non-trivialities, I didn't realize how much was involved in researching a units package until I saw what you had done. Nice job so far! Jay _______________________________________________ Axiom-developer mailing list Axiom-developer@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/axiom-developer
