From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.comp.tex.context/28224 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "luigi scarso" Newsgroups: gmane.comp.tex.context Subject: Re: [OT] Is Indesign CS 2 better than ConTeXt ? Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 12:38:50 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4476CFC2.2010901@wxs.nl> Reply-To: mailing list for ConTeXt users NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1148639978 7250 80.91.229.2 (26 May 2006 10:39:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 May 2006 10:39:38 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: ntg-context-bounces@ntg.nl Fri May 26 12:39:33 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl ([131.211.172.88] helo=ronja.ntg.nl) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FjZj5-0001Ip-KV for gctc-ntg-context-518@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:39:27 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02898127F7; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:39:27 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 09637-06; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:39:22 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.vet.uu.nl (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id 51F11127F3; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:39:22 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with ESMTP id A58EB127F3 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:39:19 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from ronja.ntg.nl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.ntg.nl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 09741-09 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:39:18 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: from py-out-1112.google.com (py-out-1112.google.com [64.233.166.182]) by ronja.ntg.nl (Postfix) with SMTP id 568D3127F1 for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 12:39:17 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by py-out-1112.google.com with SMTP id s49so77959pyc for ; Fri, 26 May 2006 03:39:15 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.35.36.13 with SMTP id o13mr436945pyj; Fri, 26 May 2006 03:38:50 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.35.132.18 with HTTP; Fri, 26 May 2006 03:38:50 -0700 (PDT) Original-To: "mailing list for ConTeXt users" In-Reply-To: <4476CFC2.2010901@wxs.nl> Content-Disposition: inline X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl X-BeenThere: ntg-context@ntg.nl X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.7 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 X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ntg.nl Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.comp.tex.context:28224 Archived-At: > i always tend to say ... "the problem does not change", so, if figuring o= ut some clever tricks to get something done, then using id or tex makes no = difference: one has to figure out the best way There are a (big) difference: a (my) solution in context costs 100=80, a solutions with IDCS2 cost 10=80 , because there are more IDCS2 programmers than TeX programmers. > concerning id ... Does IDCS2 offers a better ways to break a paragraph into lines ? pdfetex has space between words, and hz; it does not consider space between letters of a word IDCS2 has 'buttons' (my employer ask me yesterday 'Can you put buttons on context?'' maybe exa is a way to 'put buttons' on context) > > (occassionally we hear stories of failed tryout with 3b2, id, quark, etc = while tex base solutions did the job (end kept doing it) for years already;= i think that one has to decide for each situation anew) Another story: I'm using context from 2002 in a production env. for automatic pricelist and labels. Every job with 'from XML/TXT to PDF' that I have uses context. (also: dreams come true) Why ? Because it's a quick way for us to make a pdf from xml/txt ready for digital printing. > tex will always be a niche product Why ? But none say a word about Elements of Typographic Style