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