From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/57769 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Marcin Borkowski Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: The ConTeXt book Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:19 +0200 Message-ID: <20100403193519.GH21212@atos.labs.wmid.amu.edu.pl> References: Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1270323332 11902 80.91.229.12 (3 Apr 2010 19:35:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 19:35:32 +0000 (UTC) To: mailing list for ConTeXt users Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Sat Apr 03 21:35:28 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([195.12.62.10]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Ny97w-0000hN-4e for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 21:35:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93552C9EF2; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:27 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at balder.ntg.nl Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (balder.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 1byluouqMCVX; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:24 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93339C9EEC; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:24 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96344C9EEC for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:23 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at balder.ntg.nl Original-Received: from balder.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (balder.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id LHXOXY5AGPxk for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:21 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl (atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl [150.254.78.2]) by balder.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B854C9EEB for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:21 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id CEA6A10139EB for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:19 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new (PLD-Linux) at wmid.amu.edu.pl Original-Received: from atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10023) with ESMTP id SMup+lGRpor7 for ; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:19 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by atos.wmid.amu.edu.pl (Postfix, from userid 3884) id ABB2E10139E3; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 21:35:19 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: mailing list for ConTeXt users List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Errors-To: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:57769 Archived-At: Dnia Sat, Apr 03, 2010 at 08:51:03AM -0500, Michael Saunders napisał(a): > Because I think it might be possible to produce better output with > Context than with LaTeX (is this true?). My experience has been quite > different from yours. I got up an running with LaTeX in a week (in > 1995), found the documentation clear and almost any effect I wanted > easy to achieve with well-documented packages that never seriously > conflicted. This, on the other hand, is a nightmare. Yep. But when you actually run into one of these problems in LaTeX, you are often more or less left alone - unlike ConTeXt and this list. A few examples: tikz (for some obscure reason) breaks some functionality of empheq; align in intertext in align (yes, I needed something like this!) in AMS-LaTeX doesn't work; hacking the (otherwise excellent) amsrefs package (or any AMS-LaTeX package, for that matter) is a real pain, but sometimes you just need it (for example, amsthm may be a standard, but it just sucks in quite a few respects!). ============ My general thought on this discussion: someone said "why don't people switch from LaTeX to ConTeXt if ConTeXt is better?". The answer is obvious to me. First: 99% maths journals accept LaTeX, \epsilon of them (if any) accept ConTeXt. Second: people still use their LaTeX 2.09 preambles from the nineties, and spending even 30 minutes on learning a new package (or just not using $$ ... $$ but \[ ... \] or anything) seems impossible for them. Third: sadly, nearly anyone just does not care whether the results are beautiful or ugly; people (I'm talking about mathematicians now) use (La|AMS|Con)TeX(t) not because it is better than (word|OO), but because that is what journals want. Personally, I use both LaTeX and ConTeXt: LaTeX when I need something done quickly or when I want to share some code with others (who usually use LaTeX), and ConTeXt when I have some time and want to learn something new (or when I have a ready template which *just works(TM)*.) Cheers -- Marcin Borkowski (http://mbork.pl) ___________________________________________________________________________________ If your question is of interest to others as well, please add an entry to the Wiki! maillist : ntg-context@ntg.nl / http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context webpage : http://www.pragma-ade.nl / http://tex.aanhet.net archive : http://foundry.supelec.fr/projects/contextrev/ wiki : http://contextgarden.net ___________________________________________________________________________________