From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/63628
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "Philip Taylor (Webmaster, Ret'd)"
Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.texhax,gmane.comp.tex.context
Subject: Re: Choosing TeX um ... stuff
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:51:52 +0000
Message-ID: <4CE44E78.3040601@Rhul.Ac.Uk>
References:
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1290030788 29112 80.91.229.12 (17 Nov 2010 21:53:08 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:53:08 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: texhax@tug.org, mailing list for ConTeXt users
To: Peter Davis
Original-X-From: texhax-bounces@tug.org Wed Nov 17 22:53:03 2010
Return-path:
Envelope-to: gctt-texhax@gmane.org
Original-Received: from tug.org ([130.225.2.178])
by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from )
id 1PIpw5-0005W3-KJ
for gctt-texhax@gmane.org; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:53:01 +0100
Original-Received: from tug.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by tug.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAHLq0rw007024;
Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:52:03 +0100
X-Envelope-From: P.Taylor@Rhul.Ac.Uk
X-Envelope-To:
Original-Received: from smtp.nfit.au.dk (nfitmail.nfit.au.dk [130.225.31.129])
by tug.org (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAHLptOr007015
for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:51:58 +0100
Original-Received: from smtp.nfit.au.dk (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp.nfit.au.dk (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48425212F36
for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:51:55 +0100 (CET)
Original-Received: from relay.ptn-ipout02.plus.net (relay.ptn-ipout02.plus.net
[212.159.7.36])
by smtp.nfit.au.dk (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 13D30212EF6
for ; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 22:51:55 +0100 (CET)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEABPd40xUXeb6/2dsb2JhbACiU3G4DIgzhUsEhRKFRg
Original-Received: from outmx05.plus.net ([84.93.230.250])
by relay.ptn-ipout02.plus.net with ESMTP; 17 Nov 2010 21:51:54 +0000
Original-Received: from ph1l1ptayl0r.plus.com ([212.159.114.50] helo=[127.0.0.1])
by outmx05.plus.net with esmtp (Exim) id 1PIpv0-0004dX-6P;
Wed, 17 Nov 2010 21:51:54 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.9.1.15) Gecko/20101027 SeaMonkey/2.0.10
In-Reply-To:
X-NFIT-Spammy-Behaviour: True
X-NFIT-ADSL: 0
X-NFIT-RelayAddr: 212.159.7.36
X-NFIT-MX: True
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.71 on 10.19.8.13
X-Sim: 5b3381309258c96e5c1008b1da883911e49349d158d6cfe42f2f6cb5f2f0e065 2187
X-NFIT-Solido-Score: 0.
X-NilSimsa-Score: 74/114
X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.71 on 10.19.8.13
X-BeenThere: texhax@tug.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: General TeX discussion and questions
List-Unsubscribe: ,
List-Archive:
List-Post:
List-Help:
List-Subscribe: ,
Errors-To: texhax-bounces@tug.org
Original-Sender: texhax-bounces@tug.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.texhax:14450 gmane.comp.tex.context:63628
Archived-At:
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