Re: Little PDF hack

[Michael Piotrowski]

> > No, what I meant was the following: If I want hyperlinked cross
> > references, etc., I have to replace the original definitions of the
> > relevant statements (e.g., @Section) with new versions which output
> > the appropriate pdfmarks.  My question is now, what is the best way
> > to do this?
> 
> If you don't want to interfere with other users copy all of the
> relevant files somewhere and use -I option.  This way you can select
> pdfmark or standard version with this one option.  (Then the other day
> it might be integrated into standard version :).

Sorry, but I've got to ask again.  With LaTeX (which I know better), if I want 
to customize, say, the report document class, I make a new class file which 
first loads the original class, inheriting everything from it.  I then go on 
redefining just those things I need to change.

But with Lout it seems to me that it's common practice to make a copy of the 
entire original file and change it.  That right?

Apropos of common practice:  Has anybody already done some larger style 
customization of a document type?  Apart from the PDF thing I'd like to port my 
LaTeX report style to Lout (see 
http://www.linguistik.uni-erlangen.de/~mxp/Magister/ma_report_5.pdf for an 
example).  (Incidentally, it somehow happened to become the standard style at 
our site, so, if I succeeded with the port, I could easily recommend everybody 
here to use Lout.)

Greetings

-- 
Michael Piotrowski                         <address@hidden>
Department of Computational Linguistics --- University of Erlangen, Germany
You know, basically, I'm no good at either linguistics or computer science.
                                                               --Larry Wall