Khaled Hosny wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2015 at 08:52:38PM +0100, Philip Taylor wrote: >> Might it not be possible to resolve this by making the new behaviour >> optional, using a new primitive for the purpose ? > > So this just penalizes the unlucky people who need to enable the special > behaviour, I’d rather penalize everyone and have a consistent, if > erratic in someways, behaviour. I do not understand. If system A performed function Y until now, yet its designer/maintainer wishes it to perform function Y' henceforth, how can those who wish to exploit Y' be /penalised/ by being asked to invoke the operation specifically, rather than have it just happen and destroy backwards compatibility ? I see no "penalty" at all, just allowing the informed user to make an explicit choice between the two behaviours. Philip Taylor -------------------------------------------------- Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.: http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex