Re: (La)TeX vs ConTeX ?

["Gilbert van den Dobbelsteen" <gilbert@panter.soci.aau.dk>]

----- Original Message -----
From: Jorge Vilhena <jvilhena@est.ips.pt>
To: <ntg-context@ntg.nl>
Sent: woensdag 19 januari 2000 2:00
Subject: (La)TeX vs ConTeX ?

> Hello TeX Friends
>
> I'm new to the world of TeX and I've one question that I would like
someone
> to answer me. Here it is.
> What is the main differences between LaTeX and ConTeX, and what was the
goal
> in ConTeX creation?

Perhaps Taco can answer this much better than I can but let's give it a try.
If you want a stable macro-package that has decent features and is not to
complicatied, you should choose LaTeX 2.09 (this is old). If you want a
package that doesn't change a lot you could use LaTeXe (the newer LaTeX),
and if you want state-of-the-art, you could use ConTeXt

LaTex has many, many packages, and many usefull features and stuff. Since
these packages are written by different users, they usually do not work well
together (if the thing they do is similar). In practice you wouldn't notice
that. LaTeX also has a lot of users, so asking some questions and getting
the answers is usually easier, especially if there is a package that
supports your question.

ConTeXt is a sort of next generation stuff. It is pretty new, and can do
pretty advanced stuff. Some of the features:

Figure support: .eps, .png, .jpeg .pdf. If you have .eps files and you are
using pdftex, you'll need to convert the figures to pdf first. Ghostscript
can do that for you, but in my experience Acrobat Distiller does a better
job. The other formats are directly supported. The figure mechanism is
advanced and I am sure it is better than what LaTeX has to offer here.

Tables: This is simply better than in LaTeX.

Formula's: Currenty there is a math module, written by Taco, but I am not
sure what the status is. If your fomulas are in plainTeX then there is no
problem at all, ConTeXt supports all plain TeX stuff (in fact ConTeXt
supports plain TeX better than LaTeX does).

Bibliography: This is in the works, and Taco wrote a bib-tex module.

Furthermore: ConTeXt let's you easily create your own sectioning mechanism.
LaTeX is more restricted in this.

ConTeXt has a greater learning curve since you'll have to find out many
things by yourself (though the members of this list are eager to help and
support you). I found the learning curve to be very rewarding. if you have a
lot of LaTex friends, you can see the diference after a while. ConTeXt
simply makes more sense.

ConTeXt is also much more advanced if it comes to interaction, and
references (the: see figure XXX on page YYY stuff). If you use pdf as a
output-format things are made automagically clickable, and so on.

ConText also has better support for page-re-arranging, multiple table-of
contents, multiple indices, multiple paragraph levels while in LaTeX you are
always stuck with \section \subsection stuff.

Best thing for you to do is look at the manuals. There is a decent beginners
guide which is pretty down-the-drain. There is a reference guide (currently
partly in English, thogh much can be learned from the Dutch manual (even if
you don't know Dutch)).

ConTeXt is also more futurisic, while LaTeX tends to be more old-fashioned
(Don't know if that's what you're looking for).

Changing the layout of your document is usually much easier in ConTeXt.

Gilbert.