TEX profiles as objects in the category of markup languages

The mathematical notion of “category” in the context of markup languages raises the idea of widespread use of reliable automatic translations between markup languages. LTEX profiles, which are dialects of LTEX with a fixed command vocabulary where all macro expansions must be effective in that vocabulary, are suitable domains for defining translations to other profiles and, where sensible, to other markup languages. The construction of reliable translators from several journal-neutral LTEX profiles to many journalspecific LTEX profiles would eliminate the need for technical editing in the production flow for academic journals. 1 Profiled usage of LTEX We now have 15 years of experience with various efforts to translate LTEX into HTML, the language of the World Wide Web. We know that the task is more difficult than it appeared to be to many of us in the mid-1990s. Part of what makes LTEX difficult to translate is that LTEX, contrary to the impression one might gain from an initial reading of Leslie Lamport’s book [4], has never been entirely formalized as a language unto itself independent of any implementation for processing the language. Indeed, the only implementation of LTEX is that originating with Lamport — now maintained by The LTEX Project (http://www.latex-project.org/) — as a very large macro package under TEX. As slide 1 says, success with such translation requires profiled usage of LTEX. Slide 1: Translation of LTEX Question: What works well with translation software? Answer: Profiled usage of LTEX. • Carefully limited command vocabulary. • Tuned translation software. Slide 2 provides a succinct statement of what I wish to suggest. Slide 2: Today’s Suggestion formalize profiled usage