TeXhax@Score.Stanford.EDU (TeXhax Digest) (11/04/88)
TeXhax Digest Thursday, November 3, 1988 Volume 88 : Issue 99
Moderator: Malcolm Brown
Today's Topics:
Re: TeXhax Digest V88 #97 (LaTeX notes)
Landscaped table
Error regard BibTeX in TeXhax #98, 1988
telephone directory document style?
Re: TeX for journals
Questions
Waterloo SCRIPT conversion to LATEX or TEX
Producing simple document for online viewing using latex(request)
TeX for VAX/VMS
dvi2ps on a Sun 386i (and a previewer for that matter)
RE: Looking for TeX on Apollo
LaTeX files and journal submissions
Suggestions, anyone?
AFM-files needed please
\topinsert without new paragraph (TeXhax #98)
Boxed math in LaTeX
TeX for journal submissions
possible LaTeX bug??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 88 16:23:33 PDT
From: lamport@src.dec.com (Leslie Lamport)
Subject: Re: TeXhax Digest V88 #97 (LaTeX notes)
Alan Josephson writes that
\begin{doublespace}
Paragraph A
\begin{singlespace}
\[
\begin{array}{rcl}
f(a,b) & \arr & \TRUE \\
f(b,c) & \arr & \TRUE \\
g(b,c) & \arr & \TRUE \\
g(b,d) & \arr & \TRUE \\
\TRUE \wedge X & \arr & X
\end{array}
\]
\end{singlespace}
...
\end{doublespace}
Causes Paragraph A to be single-spaced. I don't know anything about
the singelspace/doublespace environments, but my guess is that they
change \baselineskip, and the value of \baselineskip used by TeX in
setting Paragraph A is the one in effect when TeX encounters the \[
command. Thus, the solution is to put the singlespace environment
inside the \[ ... \]. This is also the logical approach, since it is
the array that should be single-spaced; the logical paragraph
containing the displayed equation should be double-spaced.
Note that I do not approve of the "double-spacing" of documents.
However, the basic problem here occurs in any declaration that changes
paragraph-making parameters.
The bug in makeindex that Rick Zaccone encountered has already been
reported and fixed by Pehong Chen.
Leslie Lamport
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 88 15:34 EST
From: <BACH%CEBAFVAX.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Landscaped table
I'm working on a paper that will be approximately 120 pages long
eventually -- one page has a table that is much to wide to fit.
Is there a way to make it print landscaped (side-ways)?
Thanks for your help -- Chris Bach BACH@CEBAFVAX
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 88 22:43:59 CST
From: J E PITTMAN <JEPTEX@venus.tamu.edu>
Subject: Error regard BibTeX in TeXhax #98, 1988
In TeXhax #98, 1988, Ricardo Davis writes:
Even though I'm an infrequent user of TeX/LaTeX, I can see the
advantages of submitting journal articles in TeX input (via net-
work, of course). There may even be interest in developing
products for specific journals. Here at Texas A&M we have BibTeX,
specifically designed for thesis and dissertation preparation....
BibTeX is a tool for writing bibliographies, not thesis and dissertation prep-
aration. BluTeX is the name of Texas A&M's TeX format for theses, disserta-
tions, and records of study.
Please pardon me for being finicky about the name of my project.
J E Pittman Bitnet: JEPTEX@TAMVENUS
User Services Group Internet: JEPTEX@VENUS.TAMU.EDU
Computing Services Center
Texas A&M University
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88 11:05:54 EST
From: meyer@theory.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: telephone directory document style?
Does anyone know of a TeX or LaTeX telephone-directory document style? (I
have a four column, 7pt font, outdented telephone-directory environment in
SCRIBE, but would like to be shut of it.)
Yours truly,
Prof. Albert R. Meyer
MIT Lab. for Computer Science
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88 13:32:41 CST
From: William LeFebvre <phil@rice.edu>
Subject: Re: TeX for journals
Responses to the recent summary:
>From: Brad Miller <miller@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU>
>I see, so it's the presentation not the content that concerns you? For
>shame.
To a typesetter, the presentation *IS* more important than the content.
>From: Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem <JMS@mis.arizona.edu>
>...
>However, journals like the ACM SIG newsletters do not have the luxury
>of having outside typesetters. These journals normally accept
>camera-ready copy, and print it as received. In this case, accepting TeX is
>a big win.
Yes, but in the present discussion, I (and I assume Victor) was
implicitly making a distinction between a newsletter and a journal. A
newsletter (such as the monthly SIGPLAN newsletter) or a conference
proceedings has to go out {\it now}. Publishers of such are not
concerned with quality so much as they are with speed. But journals
(such as JACM and the different ACM "Transactions...": TOPLAS, TOG,
etc.) should be just the opposite: the quality of the page is more
important than the turn-around time. It is these "journals" that I was
targeting my comments towards. They have maintained high quality so
far---they should not use TeX as an excuse to lay off their
typesetters.
>From: <POPPELIE%HUTRUU51.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU> (Nico Poppelier)
>A very simple answer is (of course): the scientific journals should
> - use LaTeX and _not_ TeX
> - design their own document style, to be used with LaTeX.
But who decides where to insert italic corrections? Or where to insert
ties (Chapter~3)? Or where to insert \nopagebreak commands? If you
let the authors do this, they might not do a very good job. I agree
with you, though, that using LaTeX (and perhaps AMSTeX---I'm not
familiar with that package) helps to solve many of the problems, but
not all of them.
William LeFebvre
Department of Computer Science
Rice University
<phil@Rice.edu>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88 15:48:39 CDT
From: Guy Helmer <HELMER%SDNET.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Questions
I have three questions I hope somebody can answer:
1) Where can I find the .mf files that SliTeX uses? I'm just trying
to bring SliTeX up, and I can't seem to find the fonts on the tape
of TeX that I have.
2) Can I get source for DVIEW?
3) Is there a public domain version of TeX (in C or Pascal) that
works on PC-DOS?
Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 88 14:34:41 MET
From: Ton de Haan <U639019%HNYKUN11.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Waterloo SCRIPT conversion to LATEX or TEX
Does anyone know about a utility for conversion from Waterloo SCRIPT to LATEX
or TEX?
Thanks in advance,
Ton de Haan
MSA
University of Nijmegen
Toernooiveld 1
6525 ED Nijmegen
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 08:35:47 NZT
From: CCC032U@aucc1
Subject: Producing simple document for online viewing using latex(request)
At our university we maintain a large number of short documents describing
various aspects of our computer operations and software. We have traditionally
distributed these documents in a printed form but there is now a growing
need to have them available online as well.
We would much prefer to have a single source document which would then
be processed through different paths to produce the printed and online forms.
The bulk of our user notes are currently in GML (we are currently running an
IBM VM system) but we are converting them to LaTeX now.
What I need is a program that would take a LaTeX input file and produce
a file suitable for viewing on a terminal with an editor. It does not have
to reproduce different type sizes, mathematical equations etc. just the basic
text and headings.
I would preferr something with sources as I will almost certainly need to
bend it to our requirements.
Thanks
Russell Fulton
Internet: ccc032u@aucc1.aukuni.ac.nz
Postal: Computer Centre
University of Auckland
Private Bag
Auckland, New Zealand
'Phone: +64 9 737-999 x 8955 ( GMT +12 )
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 09:50:13 EST
From: Caleb Hess <hess@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
Subject: TeX for VAX/VMS
A friend would like to start using TeX on a VAX 11/780 running VMS. Where
can he get a VMS version? Is there a public domain version for VMS, or
only commercial products?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 11:14:08 est
From: lorraine@msc2.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Peter Lorraine)
Subject: dvi2ps on a Sun 386i (and a previewer for that matter)
I am having some difficulty getting dvi2ps working on a Sun 386i. The
resulting postscript files differ from those produced with a working version
on a Convex in having their 'y' coordinates hanging off the bottom of the
page. I believe both versions have the same source and am having difficulty
understanding the problem. Any help with this would be greatly appreciated.
Also, has anyone managed to get a screen previewer of dvi files working? The
byte ordering differences between the 386i and a 3/50 produce letters on
the screen which are inside out and backwards.
Thank you,
Peter Lorraine (lorraine@msc2.tn.cornell.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 08:20:20 pdt
From: mcdonald%loki.edsg@hac2arpa.hac.com (louis mcdonald)
Subject: RE: Looking for TeX on Apollo
> I am looking for a version of the TeX software that ...
> ... would run on some Apollo DN300 (Aegis 9.5.1 & BSD4.2 DOMAIN/IX)
> ... would be "buildable" with c_compiler, revision 4.65
> or with pascal_compiler, revision 7.1452
> ... would produce its output in POSTSCRIPT for a LaserWriter I
The UNIX distribution from mackay@june.cs.washington.edu is suppose
to work for Apollos. Also, TeX, DVIPS and other tools are suppose to
be available from the Apollo Domain Users' Society (ADUS). Contact
Lisa Mercier, Apollo Computer, 617-256-6600
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 1988 12:20:37.24 CDT
From: <bed_gdg%shsu.bitnet@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU> (George D. Greenwade)
Subject: LaTeX files and journal submissions
\documentstyle[jbs]{article}
\begin{document}
I have been very interested in the comments of many \TeX HaXers regarding the
submission of \TeX\ or \LaTeX\ files to journals. I am the Editor of the {\sl
Journal of Business Strategies}, an interdisciplinary journal in the field of
business. We moved to \LaTeX\ preparation about two years ago, and recently
completed a brief JBS.STY file for internal use. While it is true that we
probably ``look" like something from the \TeX\ family of processors, I would
hazard a guess that, for most of our readers, the conversion has been
transparent. The conversion has allowed us to reduce our production budget by
nearly 50\%, however, and has allowed us to expand and enhance our final
printed product. Please let me address some issues from the viewpoint of an
editor who actively uses \LaTeX , recognizing that I may not be representative
of any particular population (especially in the ``hard" sciences or in the
computer literature world).
\begin{enumerate}
%1
\item The submission of a manuscript to a journal in a \LaTeX\ formatted file
only assists in final production (cf. item 5 below). If the journal uses
external reviewers, the time lag associated with review will not be affected in
any manner which I am able to discern. For open review journals (i.e., no
review or single editor review only), submission of \LaTeX\ files is possibly
significant, but in our areas, this is a virtually non-existant creature.
%2
\item By having a typewritten submission, we are able to identify where certain
things should be placed. Not all authors are well versed in submission
requirements between publications (i.e., citation form, reference styles,
footnoting requirements, figure/table placement, etc.), thus a \LaTeX\
requirement for submission may significantly detract from the number of
manuscripts submitted. Alternatively, if the audience of the periodical is
primarily \LaTeX\ oriented to begin with (say, the audience of {\sl TUGboat}),
then the requirement of \LaTeX\ may not seriously affect submissions. As an
editor, I am willing to let a first submission document with style errors go
through the review process as the content of a poorly-styled manuscript may be
rich in information. Stylistic concerns can be addressed if the manuscript is
ultimately accepted.
%3
\item I fully agree that the final product which goes to production for
distribution is the responsibility of the Editorial staff. As such, a
submission in \LaTeX\ simply reduces input time, but does not significantly
impact on editorial time. The major gain which I am able to enjoy from the use
of \LaTeX\ is the in-house nature of production \ldots\ if I am constrained to
a ``professional" typesetter, I must provide the entire layout at one time to
receive cost reduction, thus, I must deal with a complete set of bluelines at
one time. Using \LaTeX\ allows us to have a continual flow of production,
allowing serious attention to each article as it goes through the production
cycle. We use a practice of returning the \LaTeX\ formatted document to the
author in as timely a fashion as possible for their final approval prior to
printing. Our philosophy: Once a manuscript is accepted for publication and
formatted, content is the author's primary responsibility; layout is our
primary responsibility.
%4
\item As far as speed of distribution, I believe that we are not unique in
establishing an acceptable range of printed pages prior to the production run.
This pre-production decision is central to our cost forecasting, which is
central to our continued existence. Even if a manuscript is accepted, its
final appearance in print is a function of previously-accepted manuscripts as
well as the length of the layout and number of pages still available. Moral:
typesetting time and cost alone may not be the hold-up factor in publication.
%5
\item Rather than the submission of \LaTeX -formatted manuscripts, I would much
prefer that an author provide {\em clean and clear} hard copy of black ink on
white paper. This allows us to use an optical character reader for primary
input to text files which ultimately become the .TEX files we use. The use of
the OCR is a major labor-saving device as the final file prior to the actual
\LaTeX\ run is strictly concerned with placement of the various environments
and consistency with the author's intended placements. In my case, most of the
formatting is undertaken by an undergraduate student assistant, and I review
all work prior to the \LaTeX\ run. By having a standard journal-specific style
file, training students is quite simple and I generally know what to expect
when the file is processed. The OCR allows us to input the file, format it,
run it, play with placements, and have a final copy usually within one hour.
Obviously, if elaborate tables or figures are involved, this process may take
up to two hours. We strongly discourage graphics, but if we are compelled to
include them, it is a ``cut-and-paste" exercise.
%6
\item Tied to item 5 above, if we utilized direct \LaTeX\ submission, I would
hesitate to allow for very many author-specified, author-defined macros. My
prime concern here lies in the universality of the various macros and style
files which are in use at various sites. While Ken Yap maintains an
outstanding library of files, I have found that dependence on routines outside
the direct LPLAIN.TEX, ARTICLE.STY, etc., is tricky, at best since many local
sites use slight variations which can cause problems or my site may not have
the routine specified. In other words, it is my preference to know exactly
what the .TEX file does if I am responsible for its ultimate printing and
distribution.
%7
\item Finally, the timeliness in which a submission ultimately translates into
a published article lies with the periodical's frequency. No matter how slow
an author perceives this process to be, most publications are not able to
simply publish at will. The use of \LaTeX\ allows for a more timely input and
proof; it does not necessarily allow for more timely printing. Therefore, I
would suggest that all of the arguments based on ``You'll get your manuscript
published quicker" are probably moot.
\end{enumerate}
\end{document}
George D. Greenwade, Director Bitnet: BED_GDG@SHSU
Center for Business and Economic Research THEnet: SHSU::BED_GDG
Sam Houston State University Internet: BED_GDG@SHSU.BITNET
Huntsville, Texas USA 77341-2056 Voice: (409) 294-1518
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 21:36:22 CST
From: J E PITTMAN <JEPTEX@venus.tamu.edu>
Subject: Suggestions, anyone?
To all the TeX Wizards out there: Here's a small problem. I have written an
output routine that includes the capability of doing a deferred insert, which
is an insert that does not happen until after the next time a page is output.
The intended usage is to block top inserts that occur on the first page of a
major division and could otherwise ride up over the title. The problem is that
the insert is placed at the top of the vertical list, rather than at the bottom
as I had intended. This allows an insert to float before its point of
insertion, thus making a deferred insert act like a hurry-up insert.
After carefully reading the last paragraph on page 254 of the TeXbook, I found
out that this behaviour is quite correct. My question is: How can I
transparently add material (an insert) at the end of the vertical list from
within the output routine?
J E Pittman Bitnet: JEPTEX@TAMVenus
User Services Group Internet: JEPTEX@Venus.TAMU.EDU
Computing Services Center
Texas A&M University
enclosure (an example generating file, which loops infinitely)
\output={\plainoutput
\showlists
\insert\topins{\vbox to \vsize{\hbox{insert}\vss}}%
\showlists
}%
\showboxdepth=999 \showboxbreadth=999 \tracingonline=1
\vsize=1in
\baselineskip=0.25in plus 0.1in minus 0.1in
\hsize=1in
\rightskip=0pt plus 0.75in
asd fasdf asd fas dfas df asdf asdf asdf sad fasd fsa df asdf sadf asd
fsad fasd fas dfa df asdf asdf asdf asd fasd fas df asdf asdf sad fsad
fsad fsa dfas df sadf asdf asdf asd fsad fas dfas df asdf sadfsad f
asdf sad fas
\end
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 14:10:18 GMT
Subject: AFM-files needed please
From: mcvax!lexis.hi.is!jorgen@uunet.UU.NET (Jorgen L. Pind)
Is there any kind soul on texhax who is able and willing to send me
AFM-files for the fonts built into the LaserWriter Plus (Times, Helvetica,
Symbol...). I have been totally unable to get them here from the local Adobe
dealer for six months now!
Please note that I would need new files from version 47 or later which
include metric info on the Icelandic chars /eth, /yacute and /thorn (as well
as upper case versions of these).
Jorgen Pind Tel. 354-1-694435
Institute of Lexicography Internet: jorgen@lexis.hi.is
University of Iceland UUCP: ..!mcvax!hafro!rhi!lexis!jorgen
Reykjavik 101
Iceland
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 88 16:48:19 GMT
From: CET1%phoenix.cambridge.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
Subject: \topinsert without new paragraph (TeXhax #98)
In TeXhax #98, Peter Mohr asks for a way to use \topinsert without
forcing a new paragraph. The simplest way to do this is to hide the
\topinsert, and thus the \insert that it generates, in a \vadjust,
like this:
Just testing\vadjust{\topinsert
\vglue 3 in
\leftline{Figure 1.}
\endinsert} to see whether this works! % It does!
The \par that \topinsert generates is now a no-op, and adds nothing to
the (at that point empty) vertical list of the \vadjust. Provided that
nothing unusual is going on (compare Exercise 15.13 in the TeXbook),
the effect will be as though the \topinsert were issued on the same
page as the (end of the) word ``testing'' in the above example.
You can do the same thing with \pageinsert, but don't try it with
\midinsert: it will make a terrible mess of it! Also, don't put the
\vadjust inside an \hbox (unless it is at the outermost level, e.g.
a \line called from outer vertical mode) or its contents won't migrate
properly.
Chris Thompson
JANET: cet1@uk.ac.cam.phx
ARPA: cet1%phx.cam.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 88 20:19:42 MET
From: GDFGEJO%HDETUD1.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Subject: Boxed math in LaTeX
Hi,
There is something peculiar about boxed math in LaTeX, in fact there
is no direct equivalent command for the AmsTeX \boxed{} construction.
I "discovered" this (although I should have been warned by the LaTeX
manual on pages 97 and 194) by using the \fbox{} macro which produces
the desired effect, however \fbox{only} in LR mode. In mathmode \fbox{}
produces a weird error, namely: missing $ .... etc. A simple remedy
(holding until somebody knowns better) is to defined a \boxed{} macro as:
\newcommand{\boxed}[1]{\fbox{$\displaystyle{#1}$}}
Now the \boxed{} macro appears to work under the same conditions as it
does in AmsTeX. This means that you can generate boxed math as long as
eg. no \label{} is produced inside the \boxed{} macro. For instance
\begin{equation}
\boxed{ a=f(x,y) + \frac12 g(x,y) } \label{aformula}
\end{equation}
or
\begin{eqnarray}
\boxed{a} &=& f(x,y) + \frac12 g(x,y) \label{aformula} \\
b &=& g{x,y} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
will work whereas
\begin{equation}
\boxed{ a=f(x,y) + \frac12 g(x,y) \label{aformula} }
\end{equation}
or
\begin{eqnarray}
\boxed{ a &=& f(x,y) + \frac12 g(x,y) \label{aformula} \\
b &=& g{x,y} \nonumber }
\end{eqnarray}
won't. Why is this simple \boxed{} macro not available in LaTeX?
Ejo Schrama,
Department of Geodesy TU Delft
Thijsseweg 11
2629 JA Delft
The Netherlands
Bitnet: gdfgejo@hdetud1
surfnet: tudgv1::schrama
------------------------------
Date: 2-NOV-1988 18:28:17 GMT
From: CHAA006%vaxa.rhbnc.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
Subject: TeX for journal submissions
Doug Arnold, in his message dated Thu, 27 Oct 88 18:59:55 EDT, says
"... The font problem
isn't very important for journals that will set all articles, author
typeset or not, in TeX. Such journals will have a standard set of
fonts, Computer Modern or otherwise, and can convert all received TeX
files to those fonts... "
followed by
"... The author should always send the TeX file, and not the printer
output, which can then be set by the journal on a high resolution
phototypesetter..."
But surely these two ideas, combined, may lead to extremely inelegant
and un-aesthetic results ? The layout of a TeX document is ultimately
governed by the TFM files which it references. A typographically-aware
author, having seen TeX's first efforts at typesetting his or her paper,
will invariably make slight adjustments here and there to eliminate
unsightly typesetting (widow or orphan lines, consecutive hyphenations
of the same word differing by one letter position (I've really seen TeX
do that), rivers, etc.) Agreed, one can use TeX's penalties and demerits
to influence TeX's decisions in these matters, but ultimately the
responsibility for the final document lies with the author. Now, if
the author only has acces to (say) the Computer Modern fonts, and fine-
tunes his or her document to achieve the nearest thing possible to typo-
graphical perfection, then if the journal re-processes the TeX file,
replacing all references to CM with the nearest PostScript equivalent,
the results may be absolutely hideous, and all the author's efforts to
achieve perfection will have been negated. This is true both if the
journal makes the substitution at the TeX stage (in which case the
PS TFM files will be quite different to the CM TFM files which the
author used, and therefore the line- and page-breaks will occur
at totally unpredictable places), or if the substitution is made at
the DVI stage (in which case both Adobe's and Knuth's careful
calculations of kerns, and MetaFonts careful calculation of glyph-
widths, will be totally wasted, and the result will be typographically
hideous).
There seem to be two solutions to this problem: (1) the journal
should use a well-tuned set of CM fonts on a high-resolution typesetter
(as was the case with the TeX/MetaFont quilogy, which I assume few
TeX afficionadoes would regard as typographically unsound), or (2) the TFM
files for the PostScript fonts (or another universally-acceptable set of
typographically-sound fonts) should be made generally available, and
intending authors advised to fine-tune against those metrics. Few
if any font designers would object to the general distribution of
the font-metric files for their fonts: such distribution would lead
to increased use of the fonts, which is to the designer's benefit.
What font-designers would undoubtedly object to is the indiscriminate
redistribution of the fonts themselves, wherein lies the true
intellectual property rights, but such redistribution is unecessary:
at the fine-tuning stage (but not at the final-copy stage), font
substitution {\it is\/} acceptable: the nuances of kerning and glyph
widths will be lost, but the line- and page-breaks will be identical
to the final copy.
Victor Eijkhout says (Fri, 28 Oct 88 16:13:46 MET)
"...LaTeX is already something of a de facto standard, and considering
the tools it hands to the user (tables, environments, cross referencing
to name but a few) it wouldn't be the worst imaginable.
Proposition: let journals adopt LaTeX (probably augmented with a .STY
file), and customise LATEX.TEX such that it produces a layout
which is entirely their own..."
Here I am forced to disagree. LaTeX is (probably) fine for those that
know nothing else (note: not "nothing better"), but for those who first
learned (plain) TeX, LaTeX is a nightmare. Let the journal define its
house style in typographical terms (this is just the form/content issue
abstracted one level), and let it be incumbent on the author to comply
with the journal's requirements. If the house style is expressible as
a LaTeX style-file, then all well and good: LaTeX afficionadoes will
be happy, and the workload of many authors will be reduced; but let
the plain-TeXnocrats use their own lovingly-developed and well-loved
TeXniques, so long as the house-style is achieved.
** Phil.
------------------------------
Subject: possible LaTeX bug??
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 88 13:39:12 PST
From: Craig Barratt <craig@isl.Stanford.EDU>
The following source file causes LaTeX to hang without any error messages.
The file contains obvious errors; it was reduced to this state from a
large document.
\documentstyle{article}
\begin{document}
\begin{itemize}
\section{A new section}
\end{document}
We're running LaTeX version 2.09. Any comments?
Craig Barratt
------------------------------
%%%
%%% Concerning subscriptions, address changes, unsubscribing:
%%% BITNET: send a one-line mail message to LISTSERV@TAMVM1.BITNET:
%%% SUBSCRIBE TEX-L <your name> % to subscribe
%%%
%%% All others: send mail to
%%% texhax-request@score.stanford.edu
%%% please send a valid arpanet address!!
%%%
%%%
%%% All submissions to: texhax@score.stanford.edu
%%%
%%% Back issues available for FTPing as:
%%% machine: directory: filename:
%%% [SCORE.STANFORD.EDU]<TEX.TEXHAX>TEXHAXnn.yy
%%% nn = issue number
%%% yy = last two digits of current year
%%%\bye
%%%
------------------------------
End of TeXhax Digest
**************************
-------TeXhax@Score.Stanford.EDU (TeXhax Digest) (11/05/88)
TeXhax Digest Thursday, November 3, 1988 Volume 88 : Issue 99
Moderator: Malcolm Brown
%%% Apologies to those who are receving this a second time. Score's
%%% mailer bounced yet another mail queue. Malcolm
Today's Topics:
Re: TeXhax Digest V88 #97 (LaTeX notes)
Landscaped table
Error regard BibTeX in TeXhax #98, 1988
telephone directory document style?
Re: TeX for journals
Questions
Waterloo SCRIPT conversion to LATEX or TEX
Producing simple document for online viewing using latex(request)
TeX for VAX/VMS
dvi2ps on a Sun 386i (and a previewer for that matter)
RE: Looking for TeX on Apollo
LaTeX files and journal submissions
Suggestions, anyone?
AFM-files needed please
\topinsert without new paragraph (TeXhax #98)
Boxed math in LaTeX
TeX for journal submissions
possible LaTeX bug??
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 29 Oct 88 16:23:33 PDT
From: lamport@src.dec.com (Leslie Lamport)
Subject: Re: TeXhax Digest V88 #97 (LaTeX notes)
Alan Josephson writes that
\begin{doublespace}
Paragraph A
\begin{singlespace}
\[
\begin{array}{rcl}
f(a,b) & \arr & \TRUE \\
f(b,c) & \arr & \TRUE \\
g(b,c) & \arr & \TRUE \\
g(b,d) & \arr & \TRUE \\
\TRUE \wedge X & \arr & X
\end{array}
\]
\end{singlespace}
...
\end{doublespace}
Causes Paragraph A to be single-spaced. I don't know anything about
the singelspace/doublespace environments, but my guess is that they
change \baselineskip, and the value of \baselineskip used by TeX in
setting Paragraph A is the one in effect when TeX encounters the \[
command. Thus, the solution is to put the singlespace environment
inside the \[ ... \]. This is also the logical approach, since it is
the array that should be single-spaced; the logical paragraph
containing the displayed equation should be double-spaced.
Note that I do not approve of the "double-spacing" of documents.
However, the basic problem here occurs in any declaration that changes
paragraph-making parameters.
The bug in makeindex that Rick Zaccone encountered has already been
reported and fixed by Pehong Chen.
Leslie Lamport
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 88 15:34 EST
From: <BACH%CEBAFVAX.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Landscaped table
I'm working on a paper that will be approximately 120 pages long
eventually -- one page has a table that is much to wide to fit.
Is there a way to make it print landscaped (side-ways)?
Thanks for your help -- Chris Bach BACH@CEBAFVAX
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 30 Oct 88 22:43:59 CST
From: J E PITTMAN <JEPTEX@venus.tamu.edu>
Subject: Error regard BibTeX in TeXhax #98, 1988
In TeXhax #98, 1988, Ricardo Davis writes:
Even though I'm an infrequent user of TeX/LaTeX, I can see the
advantages of submitting journal articles in TeX input (via net-
work, of course). There may even be interest in developing
products for specific journals. Here at Texas A&M we have BibTeX,
specifically designed for thesis and dissertation preparation....
BibTeX is a tool for writing bibliographies, not thesis and dissertation prep-
aration. BluTeX is the name of Texas A&M's TeX format for theses, disserta-
tions, and records of study.
Please pardon me for being finicky about the name of my project.
J E Pittman Bitnet: JEPTEX@TAMVENUS
User Services Group Internet: JEPTEX@VENUS.TAMU.EDU
Computing Services Center
Texas A&M University
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88 11:05:54 EST
From: meyer@theory.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: telephone directory document style?
Does anyone know of a TeX or LaTeX telephone-directory document style? (I
have a four column, 7pt font, outdented telephone-directory environment in
SCRIBE, but would like to be shut of it.)
Yours truly,
Prof. Albert R. Meyer
MIT Lab. for Computer Science
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88 13:32:41 CST
From: William LeFebvre <phil@rice.edu>
Subject: Re: TeX for journals
Responses to the recent summary:
>From: Brad Miller <miller@CS.ROCHESTER.EDU>
>I see, so it's the presentation not the content that concerns you? For
>shame.
To a typesetter, the presentation *IS* more important than the content.
>From: Entia non sunt multiplicanda praeter necessitatem <JMS@mis.arizona.edu>
>...
>However, journals like the ACM SIG newsletters do not have the luxury
>of having outside typesetters. These journals normally accept
>camera-ready copy, and print it as received. In this case, accepting TeX is
>a big win.
Yes, but in the present discussion, I (and I assume Victor) was
implicitly making a distinction between a newsletter and a journal. A
newsletter (such as the monthly SIGPLAN newsletter) or a conference
proceedings has to go out {\it now}. Publishers of such are not
concerned with quality so much as they are with speed. But journals
(such as JACM and the different ACM "Transactions...": TOPLAS, TOG,
etc.) should be just the opposite: the quality of the page is more
important than the turn-around time. It is these "journals" that I was
targeting my comments towards. They have maintained high quality so
far---they should not use TeX as an excuse to lay off their
typesetters.
>From: <POPPELIE%HUTRUU51.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU> (Nico Poppelier)
>A very simple answer is (of course): the scientific journals should
> - use LaTeX and _not_ TeX
> - design their own document style, to be used with LaTeX.
But who decides where to insert italic corrections? Or where to insert
ties (Chapter~3)? Or where to insert \nopagebreak commands? If you
let the authors do this, they might not do a very good job. I agree
with you, though, that using LaTeX (and perhaps AMSTeX---I'm not
familiar with that package) helps to solve many of the problems, but
not all of them.
William LeFebvre
Department of Computer Science
Rice University
<phil@Rice.edu>
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 88 15:48:39 CDT
From: Guy Helmer <HELMER%SDNET.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Questions
I have three questions I hope somebody can answer:
1) Where can I find the .mf files that SliTeX uses? I'm just trying
to bring SliTeX up, and I can't seem to find the fonts on the tape
of TeX that I have.
2) Can I get source for DVIEW?
3) Is there a public domain version of TeX (in C or Pascal) that
works on PC-DOS?
Thanks.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 88 14:34:41 MET
From: Ton de Haan <U639019%HNYKUN11.BITNET@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU>
Subject: Waterloo SCRIPT conversion to LATEX or TEX
Does anyone know about a utility for conversion from Waterloo SCRIPT to LATEX
or TEX?
Thanks in advance,
Ton de Haan
MSA
University of Nijmegen
Toernooiveld 1
6525 ED Nijmegen
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 08:35:47 NZT
From: CCC032U@aucc1
Subject: Producing simple document for online viewing using latex(request)
At our university we maintain a large number of short documents describing
various aspects of our computer operations and software. We have traditionally
distributed these documents in a printed form but there is now a growing
need to have them available online as well.
We would much prefer to have a single source document which would then
be processed through different paths to produce the printed and online forms.
The bulk of our user notes are currently in GML (we are currently running an
IBM VM system) but we are converting them to LaTeX now.
What I need is a program that would take a LaTeX input file and produce
a file suitable for viewing on a terminal with an editor. It does not have
to reproduce different type sizes, mathematical equations etc. just the basic
text and headings.
I would preferr something with sources as I will almost certainly need to
bend it to our requirements.
Thanks
Russell Fulton
Internet: ccc032u@aucc1.aukuni.ac.nz
Postal: Computer Centre
University of Auckland
Private Bag
Auckland, New Zealand
'Phone: +64 9 737-999 x 8955 ( GMT +12 )
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 09:50:13 EST
From: Caleb Hess <hess@iuvax.cs.indiana.edu>
Subject: TeX for VAX/VMS
A friend would like to start using TeX on a VAX 11/780 running VMS. Where
can he get a VMS version? Is there a public domain version for VMS, or
only commercial products?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 11:14:08 est
From: lorraine@msc2.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Peter Lorraine)
Subject: dvi2ps on a Sun 386i (and a previewer for that matter)
I am having some difficulty getting dvi2ps working on a Sun 386i. The
resulting postscript files differ from those produced with a working version
on a Convex in having their 'y' coordinates hanging off the bottom of the
page. I believe both versions have the same source and am having difficulty
understanding the problem. Any help with this would be greatly appreciated.
Also, has anyone managed to get a screen previewer of dvi files working? The
byte ordering differences between the 386i and a 3/50 produce letters on
the screen which are inside out and backwards.
Thank you,
Peter Lorraine (lorraine@msc2.tn.cornell.edu)
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 08:20:20 pdt
From: mcdonald%loki.edsg@hac2arpa.hac.com (louis mcdonald)
Subject: RE: Looking for TeX on Apollo
> I am looking for a version of the TeX software that ...
> ... would run on some Apollo DN300 (Aegis 9.5.1 & BSD4.2 DOMAIN/IX)
> ... would be "buildable" with c_compiler, revision 4.65
> or with pascal_compiler, revision 7.1452
> ... would produce its output in POSTSCRIPT for a LaserWriter I
The UNIX distribution from mackay@june.cs.washington.edu is suppose
to work for Apollos. Also, TeX, DVIPS and other tools are suppose to
be available from the Apollo Domain Users' Society (ADUS). Contact
Lisa Mercier, Apollo Computer, 617-256-6600
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Oct 1988 12:20:37.24 CDT
From: <bed_gdg%shsu.bitnet@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU> (George D. Greenwade)
Subject: LaTeX files and journal submissions
\documentstyle[jbs]{article}
\begin{document}
I have been very interested in the comments of many \TeX HaXers regarding the
submission of \TeX\ or \LaTeX\ files to journals. I am the Editor of the {\sl
Journal of Business Strategies}, an interdisciplinary journal in the field of
business. We moved to \LaTeX\ preparation about two years ago, and recently
completed a brief JBS.STY file for internal use. While it is true that we
probably ``look" like something from the \TeX\ family of processors, I would
hazard a guess that, for most of our readers, the conversion has been
transparent. The conversion has allowed us to reduce our production budget by
nearly 50\%, however, and has allowed us to expand and enhance our final
printed product. Please let me address some issues from the viewpoint of an
editor who actively uses \LaTeX , recognizing that I may not be representative
of any particular population (especially in the ``hard" sciences or in the
computer literature world).
\begin{enumerate}
%1
\item The submission of a manuscript to a journal in a \LaTeX\ formatted file
only assists in final production (cf. item 5 below). If the journal uses
external reviewers, the time lag associated with review will not be affected in
any manner which I am able to discern. For open review journals (i.e., no
review or single editor review only), submission of \LaTeX\ files is possibly
significant, but in our areas, this is a virtually non-existant creature.
%2
\item By having a typewritten submission, we are able to identify where certain
things should be placed. Not all authors are well versed in submission
requirements between publications (i.e., citation form, reference styles,
footnoting requirements, figure/table placement, etc.), thus a \LaTeX\
requirement for submission may significantly detract from the number of
manuscripts submitted. Alternatively, if the audience of the periodical is
primarily \LaTeX\ oriented to begin with (say, the audience of {\sl TUGboat}),
then the requirement of \LaTeX\ may not seriously affect submissions. As an
editor, I am willing to let a first submission document with style errors go
through the review process as the content of a poorly-styled manuscript may be
rich in information. Stylistic concerns can be addressed if the manuscript is
ultimately accepted.
%3
\item I fully agree that the final product which goes to production for
distribution is the responsibility of the Editorial staff. As such, a
submission in \LaTeX\ simply reduces input time, but does not significantly
impact on editorial time. The major gain which I am able to enjoy from the use
of \LaTeX\ is the in-house nature of production \ldots\ if I am constrained to
a ``professional" typesetter, I must provide the entire layout at one time to
receive cost reduction, thus, I must deal with a complete set of bluelines at
one time. Using \LaTeX\ allows us to have a continual flow of production,
allowing serious attention to each article as it goes through the production
cycle. We use a practice of returning the \LaTeX\ formatted document to the
author in as timely a fashion as possible for their final approval prior to
printing. Our philosophy: Once a manuscript is accepted for publication and
formatted, content is the author's primary responsibility; layout is our
primary responsibility.
%4
\item As far as speed of distribution, I believe that we are not unique in
establishing an acceptable range of printed pages prior to the production run.
This pre-production decision is central to our cost forecasting, which is
central to our continued existence. Even if a manuscript is accepted, its
final appearance in print is a function of previously-accepted manuscripts as
well as the length of the layout and number of pages still available. Moral:
typesetting time and cost alone may not be the hold-up factor in publication.
%5
\item Rather than the submission of \LaTeX -formatted manuscripts, I would much
prefer that an author provide {\em clean and clear} hard copy of black ink on
white paper. This allows us to use an optical character reader for primary
input to text files which ultimately become the .TEX files we use. The use of
the OCR is a major labor-saving device as the final file prior to the actual
\LaTeX\ run is strictly concerned with placement of the various environments
and consistency with the author's intended placements. In my case, most of the
formatting is undertaken by an undergraduate student assistant, and I review
all work prior to the \LaTeX\ run. By having a standard journal-specific style
file, training students is quite simple and I generally know what to expect
when the file is processed. The OCR allows us to input the file, format it,
run it, play with placements, and have a final copy usually within one hour.
Obviously, if elaborate tables or figures are involved, this process may take
up to two hours. We strongly discourage graphics, but if we are compelled to
include them, it is a ``cut-and-paste" exercise.
%6
\item Tied to item 5 above, if we utilized direct \LaTeX\ submission, I would
hesitate to allow for very many author-specified, author-defined macros. My
prime concern here lies in the universality of the various macros and style
files which are in use at various sites. While Ken Yap maintains an
outstanding library of files, I have found that dependence on routines outside
the direct LPLAIN.TEX, ARTICLE.STY, etc., is tricky, at best since many local
sites use slight variations which can cause problems or my site may not have
the routine specified. In other words, it is my preference to know exactly
what the .TEX file does if I am responsible for its ultimate printing and
distribution.
%7
\item Finally, the timeliness in which a submission ultimately translates into
a published article lies with the periodical's frequency. No matter how slow
an author perceives this process to be, most publications are not able to
simply publish at will. The use of \LaTeX\ allows for a more timely input and
proof; it does not necessarily allow for more timely printing. Therefore, I
would suggest that all of the arguments based on ``You'll get your manuscript
published quicker" are probably moot.
\end{enumerate}
\end{document}
George D. Greenwade, Director Bitnet: BED_GDG@SHSU
Center for Business and Economic Research THEnet: SHSU::BED_GDG
Sam Houston State University Internet: BED_GDG@SHSU.BITNET
Huntsville, Texas USA 77341-2056 Voice: (409) 294-1518
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 21:36:22 CST
From: J E PITTMAN <JEPTEX@venus.tamu.edu>
Subject: Suggestions, anyone?
To all the TeX Wizards out there: Here's a small problem. I have written an
output routine that includes the capability of doing a deferred insert, which
is an insert that does not happen until after the next time a page is output.
The intended usage is to block top inserts that occur on the first page of a
major division and could otherwise ride up over the title. The problem is that
the insert is placed at the top of the vertical list, rather than at the bottom
as I had intended. This allows an insert to float before its point of
insertion, thus making a deferred insert act like a hurry-up insert.
After carefully reading the last paragraph on page 254 of the TeXbook, I found
out that this behaviour is quite correct. My question is: How can I
transparently add material (an insert) at the end of the vertical list from
within the output routine?
J E Pittman Bitnet: JEPTEX@TAMVenus
User Services Group Internet: JEPTEX@Venus.TAMU.EDU
Computing Services Center
Texas A&M University
enclosure (an example generating file, which loops infinitely)
\output={\plainoutput
\showlists
\insert\topins{\vbox to \vsize{\hbox{insert}\vss}}%
\showlists
}%
\showboxdepth=999 \showboxbreadth=999 \tracingonline=1
\vsize=1in
\baselineskip=0.25in plus 0.1in minus 0.1in
\hsize=1in
\rightskip=0pt plus 0.75in
asd fasdf asd fas dfas df asdf asdf asdf sad fasd fsa df asdf sadf asd
fsad fasd fas dfa df asdf asdf asdf asd fasd fas df asdf asdf sad fsad
fsad fsa dfas df sadf asdf asdf asd fsad fas dfas df asdf sadfsad f
asdf sad fas
\end
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 1 Nov 88 14:10:18 GMT
Subject: AFM-files needed please
From: mcvax!lexis.hi.is!jorgen@uunet.UU.NET (Jorgen L. Pind)
Is there any kind soul on texhax who is able and willing to send me
AFM-files for the fonts built into the LaserWriter Plus (Times, Helvetica,
Symbol...). I have been totally unable to get them here from the local Adobe
dealer for six months now!
Please note that I would need new files from version 47 or later which
include metric info on the Icelandic chars /eth, /yacute and /thorn (as well
as upper case versions of these).
Jorgen Pind Tel. 354-1-694435
Institute of Lexicography Internet: jorgen@lexis.hi.is
University of Iceland UUCP: ..!mcvax!hafro!rhi!lexis!jorgen
Reykjavik 101
Iceland
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 88 16:48:19 GMT
From: CET1%phoenix.cambridge.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
Subject: \topinsert without new paragraph (TeXhax #98)
In TeXhax #98, Peter Mohr asks for a way to use \topinsert without
forcing a new paragraph. The simplest way to do this is to hide the
\topinsert, and thus the \insert that it generates, in a \vadjust,
like this:
Just testing\vadjust{\topinsert
\vglue 3 in
\leftline{Figure 1.}
\endinsert} to see whether this works! % It does!
The \par that \topinsert generates is now a no-op, and adds nothing to
the (at that point empty) vertical list of the \vadjust. Provided that
nothing unusual is going on (compare Exercise 15.13 in the TeXbook),
the effect will be as though the \topinsert were issued on the same
page as the (end of the) word ``testing'' in the above example.
You can do the same thing with \pageinsert, but don't try it with
\midinsert: it will make a terrible mess of it! Also, don't put the
\vadjust inside an \hbox (unless it is at the outermost level, e.g.
a \line called from outer vertical mode) or its contents won't migrate
properly.
Chris Thompson
JANET: cet1@uk.ac.cam.phx
ARPA: cet1%phx.cam.ac.uk@nss.cs.ucl.ac.uk
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 88 20:19:42 MET
From: GDFGEJO%HDETUD1.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
Subject: Boxed math in LaTeX
Hi,
There is something peculiar about boxed math in LaTeX, in fact there
is no direct equivalent command for the AmsTeX \boxed{} construction.
I "discovered" this (although I should have been warned by the LaTeX
manual on pages 97 and 194) by using the \fbox{} macro which produces
the desired effect, however \fbox{only} in LR mode. In mathmode \fbox{}
produces a weird error, namely: missing $ .... etc. A simple remedy
(holding until somebody knowns better) is to defined a \boxed{} macro as:
\newcommand{\boxed}[1]{\fbox{$\displaystyle{#1}$}}
Now the \boxed{} macro appears to work under the same conditions as it
does in AmsTeX. This means that you can generate boxed math as long as
eg. no \label{} is produced inside the \boxed{} macro. For instance
\begin{equation}
\boxed{ a=f(x,y) + \frac12 g(x,y) } \label{aformula}
\end{equation}
or
\begin{eqnarray}
\boxed{a} &=& f(x,y) + \frac12 g(x,y) \label{aformula} \\
b &=& g{x,y} \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
will work whereas
\begin{equation}
\boxed{ a=f(x,y) + \frac12 g(x,y) \label{aformula} }
\end{equation}
or
\begin{eqnarray}
\boxed{ a &=& f(x,y) + \frac12 g(x,y) \label{aformula} \\
b &=& g{x,y} \nonumber }
\end{eqnarray}
won't. Why is this simple \boxed{} macro not available in LaTeX?
Ejo Schrama,
Department of Geodesy TU Delft
Thijsseweg 11
2629 JA Delft
The Netherlands
Bitnet: gdfgejo@hdetud1
surfnet: tudgv1::schrama
------------------------------
Date: 2-NOV-1988 18:28:17 GMT
From: CHAA006%vaxa.rhbnc.ac.uk@NSS.Cs.Ucl.AC.UK
Subject: TeX for journal submissions
Doug Arnold, in his message dated Thu, 27 Oct 88 18:59:55 EDT, says
"... The font problem
isn't very important for journals that will set all articles, author
typeset or not, in TeX. Such journals will have a standard set of
fonts, Computer Modern or otherwise, and can convert all received TeX
files to those fonts... "
followed by
"... The author should always send the TeX file, and not the printer
output, which can then be set by the journal on a high resolution
phototypesetter..."
But surely these two ideas, combined, may lead to extremely inelegant
and un-aesthetic results ? The layout of a TeX document is ultimately
governed by the TFM files which it references. A typographically-aware
author, having seen TeX's first efforts at typesetting his or her paper,
will invariably make slight adjustments here and there to eliminate
unsightly typesetting (widow or orphan lines, consecutive hyphenations
of the same word differing by one letter position (I've really seen TeX
do that), rivers, etc.) Agreed, one can use TeX's penalties and demerits
to influence TeX's decisions in these matters, but ultimately the
responsibility for the final document lies with the author. Now, if
the author only has acces to (say) the Computer Modern fonts, and fine-
tunes his or her document to achieve the nearest thing possible to typo-
graphical perfection, then if the journal re-processes the TeX file,
replacing all references to CM with the nearest PostScript equivalent,
the results may be absolutely hideous, and all the author's efforts to
achieve perfection will have been negated. This is true both if the
journal makes the substitution at the TeX stage (in which case the
PS TFM files will be quite different to the CM TFM files which the
author used, and therefore the line- and page-breaks will occur
at totally unpredictable places), or if the substitution is made at
the DVI stage (in which case both Adobe's and Knuth's careful
calculations of kerns, and MetaFonts careful calculation of glyph-
widths, will be totally wasted, and the result will be typographically
hideous).
There seem to be two solutions to this problem: (1) the journal
should use a well-tuned set of CM fonts on a high-resolution typesetter
(as was the case with the TeX/MetaFont quilogy, which I assume few
TeX afficionadoes would regard as typographically unsound), or (2) the TFM
files for the PostScript fonts (or another universally-acceptable set of
typographically-sound fonts) should be made generally available, and
intending authors advised to fine-tune against those metrics. Few
if any font designers would object to the general distribution of
the font-metric files for their fonts: such distribution would lead
to increased use of the fonts, which is to the designer's benefit.
What font-designers would undoubtedly object to is the indiscriminate
redistribution of the fonts themselves, wherein lies the true
intellectual property rights, but such redistribution is unecessary:
at the fine-tuning stage (but not at the final-copy stage), font
substitution {\it is\/} acceptable: the nuances of kerning and glyph
widths will be lost, but the line- and page-breaks will be identical
to the final copy.
Victor Eijkhout says (Fri, 28 Oct 88 16:13:46 MET)
"...LaTeX is already something of a de facto standard, and considering
the tools it hands to the user (tables, environments, cross referencing
to name but a few) it wouldn't be the worst imaginable.
Proposition: let journals adopt LaTeX (probably augmented with a .STY
file), and customise LATEX.TEX such that it produces a layout
which is entirely their own..."
Here I am forced to disagree. LaTeX is (probably) fine for those that
know nothing else (note: not "nothing better"), but for those who first
learned (plain) TeX, LaTeX is a nightmare. Let the journal define its
house style in typographical terms (this is just the form/content issue
abstracted one level), and let it be incumbent on the author to comply
with the journal's requirements. If the house style is expressible as
a LaTeX style-file, then all well and good: LaTeX afficionadoes will
be happy, and the workload of many authors will be reduced; but let
the plain-TeXnocrats use their own lovingly-developed and well-loved
TeXniques, so long as the house-style is achieved.
** Phil.
------------------------------
Subject: possible LaTeX bug??
Date: Wed, 02 Nov 88 13:39:12 PST
From: Craig Barratt <craig@isl.Stanford.EDU>
The following source file causes LaTeX to hang without any error messages.
The file contains obvious errors; it was reduced to this state from a
large document.
\documentstyle{article}
\begin{document}
\begin{itemize}
\section{A new section}
\end{document}
We're running LaTeX version 2.09. Any comments?
Craig Barratt
------------------------------
%%%
%%% Concerning subscriptions, address changes, unsubscribing:
%%% BITNET: send a one-line mail message to LISTSERV@TAMVM1.BITNET:
%%% SUBSCRIBE TEX-L <your name> % to subscribe
%%%
%%% All others: send mail to
%%% texhax-request@score.stanford.edu
%%% please send a valid arpanet address!!
%%%
%%%
%%% All submissions to: texhax@score.stanford.edu
%%%
%%% Back issues available for FTPing as:
%%% machine: directory: filename:
%%% [SCORE.STANFORD.EDU]<TEX.TEXHAX>TEXHAXnn.yy
%%% nn = issue number
%%% yy = last two digits of current year
%%%\bye
%%%
------------------------------
End of TeXhax Digest
**************************
-------