From: "Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd)" <P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
To: Peter Davis <pfd@pfdstudio.com>
Cc: texhax@tug.org, mailing list for ConTeXt users <ntg-context@ntg.nl>
Subject: Re: Choosing TeX um ... stuff
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:51:52 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4CE44E78.3040601@Rhul.Ac.Uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTin0Ys19vOC2tvcaK+1_5wbsZEMfmz+_jw1+U9Cu@mail.gmail.com>
Peter Davis wrote:
> I've been on the periphery of TeX for years, as a casual user of LaTeX
> and also as an implementer of publishing software. However, I'm afraid
> I haven't kept in as close touch as I'd like, and now I find myself
> trying to absorb a lot in a short time. I'm trying to choose what
> software to use in building an XML->TeX workflow.
>
> I'd appreciate any help with the following questions:
>
> 1. True or False: TeX can be categorized along three orthogonal axes:
> 1. by format (plain TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, others?)
> 2. by implementation (web2c, pdfTeX/pdfLaTeX, LuaTeX, others?)
> 3. by distribution (MikTeX, TeXLive, MacTeX, others?)
2) is false; whilst "web2c" is a methodology and
an basis for implementation, pdfTeX is a derivative,
pdfLaTeX is simply LaTeX layered on top of PdfTeX,
LuaTeX is a major fork, and so on.
> 2. True or False: plain TeX and LaTeX(2e) are warhorses ... been
> around for decades, quirks well known, lots of documentation, etc.
Yes, except that while Plain TeX has more-or-less remained
static (modulo essential bug fixes by Don), LaTeX2e has
continued to evolve. I have heard rumours that this particular
evolutionary branch may have come to an end, but I have
no definite knowledge of this.
> 3. True or False: ConTeXt is newer, with a lot of built-in features,
> but still changing quite a bit from build to build.
Context is a L O T newer : it has many devotees, but is still
something of an outside to mainstream TeX usage.
>
> Other comments welcome vis. picking which software to use. One point is
> that since the actual TeX input files will be generated
> programmatically, readability or ease-of-coding is not a factor. I was
> going to use plain TeX, but it seems a lot of features like placing text
> boxes and graphics anywhere, using system fonts, etc. are more available
> for LaTeX and ConTeXt.
>
> Thank you for any comments!
Talk to River Valley and/or Sebastian Rahtz; both have considerable
knowledge of the matters that interest you.
Philip Taylor
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-17 21:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-17 21:23 Peter Davis
2010-11-17 21:38 ` Mojca Miklavec
2010-11-17 21:51 ` Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd) [this message]
2010-11-17 22:06 ` Paul Isambert
2010-11-18 8:24 ` [texhax] " Hans Hagen
2010-11-18 8:35 ` luigi scarso
2010-11-18 10:56 ` Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd)
2010-11-17 22:00 ` Hans Hagen
2010-11-18 1:29 ` Peter Davis
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=4CE44E78.3040601@Rhul.Ac.Uk \
--to=p.taylor@rhul.ac.uk \
--cc=ntg-context@ntg.nl \
--cc=pfd@pfdstudio.com \
--cc=texhax@tug.org \
/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).