Dear all: Sorry if this question is not appropriate for this forum - I am a newbie, I tried to read at least one month's worth of emails, and... I do not come to this list from the perspective of an author, who can afford to give his work huge amounts of time till it is set just right. I come here from the perspective of a publisher/editor (Indiana University Mathematics Journal), where the outlook is quite different: You take many papers (LaTeX source files), written by people whose expertise ranges from spaghetti-TeX to guru-TeX, and you "massage" them to conform to the Journal format and to make them look as nice as possible. (Perfection remains always on the horizon - you got to meet the printers' deadlines.) That said by way of introduction, I am contemplating a move for the IUMJ away from LaTeX to ... I have two reasons to recommend abandoning LaTeX: (1) LaTeX's conversion to other formats (excluding PDF) is laborius and falls very short of the ideal, and (2) long-term archiving and long-term reusability in settings we may not even envisage at this time forces me to think XML... XML... XML. So, I have been delving into ConTeXt, and I like its syntax: far "cleaner" than LaTeX. I have also read that there is work in progress to convert XML to ConTeXt --- my question is, any thoughts, hints, recommendations about reverse-engineering, that is, from ConTeXt to XML? If the IUMJ switched production to ConTeXt, we would still want to preserve on "archival" copy in XML. (As of now we translate LaTeX to XML using "hermes", but it would not work with ConTeXt.) If nothing is contemplated in the area of *from ConTeXt to XML", might this strategy work ConTeXt -> pdf - pdf to XML ? I apologize if the topic is off bounds, and will be grateful if anyone decides to think outloud on this subject. Best, elena Elena Fraboschi Indiana University Mathematics Journal