[NTG-context] Re: Wiki - test/proposal to further clarify documentation

[Henning Hraban Ramm <texml@fiee.net>]

Am 17.04.24 um 10:36 schrieb Hans Hagen:
> On 4/17/2024 8:32 AM, Thomas A. Schmitz wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On 16. Apr 2024, at 21:56, Peter Hopcroft via ntg-context 
>>> <ntg-context@ntg.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> On 17/04/2024, at 7:11 AM, Henning Hraban Ramm <texml@fiee.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> In my poster (still WIP) I wrote:
>>>> …
>>>
>>> Excellent
>>
>> No, I must admit I don’t like the first two paragraphs. The question 
>> is “what is ConTeXt,” and the answer is “we’re not LaTeX.” And why 
>> “infamous”?
> I agree. It sounds the same as "we're not msword" or "we're not google 
> docs". (In the end the only thing that latex and context have in common 
> is that they use the tex language / ecosystem.)

In my experience, most people interested in ConTeXt know LaTeX, so it 
makes sense to compare.
And I actually just say “LaTeX is the most known command-based 
typesetting system” (that’s just true) to shortcut explaining what a 
cbts might be.

Your critique applies to JUH’s quote, though.

I used “infamous” as a funny way to say “not famous, but somewhat known” 
(and yes, I know Latin and what the words really mean).

Hraban
___________________________________________________________________________________
If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki!

maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / https://mailman.ntg.nl/mailman3/lists/ntg-context.ntg.nl
webpage  : https://www.pragma-ade.nl / https://context.aanhet.net (mirror)
archive  : https://github.com/contextgarden/context
wiki     : https://wiki.contextgarden.net
___________________________________________________________________________________