From: CB <cb.lists@gmail.com>
Subject: Context, LaTeX, or an XML for academic writing?
Date: Sat, 07 May 2005 12:58:19 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <427C2ECB.4070808@gmail.com> (raw)
Hi,
I'm returning to graduate study after a few years out in the workplace.
I'm a bit rusty on what good stuff there is out there for academic
writing, and after a bit of research I've come up with: ConTeXt, LaTeX
or an XML dtd (tbook or DocBook?) plus appropriate tools. I'm ruling out
Word (having wrestled with it at work), and am reluctant to use anything
similar like OpenOffice. I have used LaTeX for some things in the past.
There will a little maths in my writing, but it's not central.
Here are my main criteria for choice, in order of priority:
1) future-proofing. ie. I want my text to be always available to me
forever, or until I die, whichever comes first. I take this to mean that
I want the canonical form of my documents to be plain text of some sort.
It also means that the system needs to be widely-used enough that it
will be translateable into essential future formats as they arise.
2) semantic rather than layout-oriented markup as much as possible. I'm
impatient with, and marginally interested in, layout. I'm very
interested in what my text means. As much as possible, I want to set up
my layouts early in the piece, and never think about them again.
3) relatively easy integration with some form of bibliographic
database(ish) system (bibtex would do).
4) ability to produce pdf's, html, and rtf versions (for interoperation
with Word-users) at least.
5) no need for me to write any code. I used to be a programmer, and when
I left, promised myself, my wife, and my cat that I would never write a
line of code again. I don't mind a bit of TeXish fiddling if
*absolutely* necessary.
ConTeXt seems to fit the bill for 1,3 and 5. I'm not sure about 4 (html?
rtf?) or 2 (I haven't had a proper look at the nature of the available
macros yet) .
Would anyone with 1st hand knowledge of writing in academia care to
comment either on the above or your own reasons for your choice of
tools? I am doing my own research on all this stuff, but I know that
until I get into the fray, there will be things I haven't thought of.
Cheers,
CB.
next reply other threads:[~2005-05-07 2:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-05-07 2:58 CB [this message]
2005-05-09 9:48 ` Ville Voipio
2005-05-10 23:52 ` CB
2005-05-11 6:52 ` Henning Hraban Ramm
2005-05-12 13:46 ` Ville Voipio
2005-05-13 0:05 ` CB
2005-05-14 12:45 Tobias Wolf
2005-05-16 17:50 ` John R. Culleton
2005-05-17 0:59 ` Tobias Burnus
2005-05-17 12:41 ` Tobias Wolf
2005-05-17 4:03 ` Matthias Weber
[not found] ` <e06bd0fe050517055047c3210b@mail.gmail.com>
2005-05-17 12:52 ` Tobias Wolf
2005-05-17 22:41 Ville Voipio
2005-05-18 2:10 ` Paul Tremblay
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=427C2ECB.4070808@gmail.com \
--to=cb.lists@gmail.com \
--cc=ntg-context@ntg.nl \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).