yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) (11/12/90)
Well due to being required to take an english course i have to write a paper so i decided on a topic i am interested in. TeX! Now i want to know what all of the TeXperts out there Like soo much about TeX. (Kinda general huh..) some specifics, (But don't limit your self to these) 1) Why is a "Language" like program soo much better then a WYSIYUG program a) Why is TeX better then WORD (Ick) b) That can ya do with TeX that ya can't with <insert Prog name here> 2) How advanced is the "macro" ability, and what's a good way to prove this. 3) I am still learning about TeX and TeX related topics, Is there a good place i can find a Glossery of "TeX terms" like what's a file.sty file? I know now it's a Style File, but what's that? 4) Why is TeX better then Troff or Nroff. (dvi files for one) 5) What's this about DVI files and professional typsetting machines. The audience for my paper is to be "people who could benifit from TeX" so i need to have nice clear definitions. ----- yorkw@ecn.purdue.edu -- yorkw@ecn.purdue.edu Willis F York ---------------------------------------------- Macintosh... Proof that a Person can use a Computer all day and still not know ANYTHING about computers.
eijkhout@s41.csrd.uiuc.edu (Victor Eijkhout) (11/13/90)
yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) writes: >Now i want to know what all of the TeXperts out there Like soo much >about TeX. >(Kinda general huh..) >some specifics, (But don't limit your self to these) >1) Why is a "Language" like program soo much better then a WYSIYUG program > a) Why is TeX better then WORD (Ick) > b) That can ya do with TeX that ya can't with <insert Prog name here> This is the most important aspect of TeX. A programmable system is by definition better than a fixed system, because you can add whatever is not part of it. Of course you must have a good collection of primitive operations, and TeX has that. Usual wysiwyg systems lack the most elementary operations. For instance, there are practically no systems that can behave like \parindent=0pt \parfillskip=0pt, that is, produce rectangular paragraphs. >2) How advanced is the "macro" ability, and what's a good way to prove this. Very. Look up my article on 'unusual paragraph shapes' in Tugboat, number 1 this year, to see some things that are rather complicated, and still heavily automated. Victor.
walter@hpsadle.HP.COM (Walter Coole) (11/13/90)
At some risk of redundancy, I'd suggest you look at the TeXbook and the LaTeX
book, since many of the questions you have aren't short answer questions.
IMHO: WYSIWYG vs. TeX
There is no actual WYSIWYG word processor, due to resolution, aspect ratio,
CPU horsepower limitations, you end up with "the best we can manage to
represent what you're going to get". I find that an adequate
previewer does a better job of showing me what my document is going to
look like than the typical MSDOS word processor. Most wp's are harder
to adapt to new CPU, printer, and software rev. than TeX has been for
me. TeX is better suited to long documents (books) than wp's, but
still reasonably convenient for papers, memos, etc. TeX allows much
more precise control over format. TeX is readily extensible and
customizable, while the macro facility in most wp's is fairly
primitive. For the typical naive user LaTeX is probably easier to use
than plain TeX, so it is probably the best comparison with wp's.
troff vs. TeX
troff is the AT&T standard way to deal with text, so many UNIX
programs do things in ways that produce sensible troff. nroff is
compatible with troff and is the standard way for man pages to be
formatted. Other than interaction with other UNIX tools, I find
troff's command language to be clumsier than TeX (I may be biased, since
I'm more familiar with TeX). There are fewer supported devices for
ditroff than for dvi. troff requires a license while TeX is
available for free.
TeX's macro facility is, in fact, a complete programming language,
unlike the simple keyboard macro capability of some wp's. While size,
fluency and speed may make certain things undesirable to write in TeX, there
are no fundamental barriers precluding any sort of computation within TeX.yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) (11/13/90)
Well How do i Look up stuff in 'TugBoat' I know it's a TeX magazine but i've never seen it at any news stands. Well I'm getting Lots of Great info for my paper. How about a few more general questions. What does LaTeX stand for. (Lay Mans Tex?) How widly used is the "international" character ability used? (ie. the german characters,ect...) ------- I'm not bugging anyone with these questions am i? oh yea. What's AMStex. (sp) I saw a Book for it but diden't get it. What's the "wildest" "wierdest" thing anyone has Done with Tex? (I thought the little phone book was neat) Keep that info comming. . -- yorkw@ecn.purdue.edu Willis F York ---------------------------------------------- Macintosh... Proof that a Person can use a Computer all day and still not know ANYTHING about computers.
myers@ut-emx.uucp (Eric Myers) (11/13/90)
In article <yorkw.658442634@stable.ecn.purdue.edu> yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) writes: >What's the "wildest" "wierdest" thing anyone has Done with Tex? "Typesetting" Feynman diagrams (those physics diagrams showing electrons scattering off photons and such) gets my vote. It's also in the TUGboat somewhere. >Macintosh... Proof that a Person can use a Computer all day and still >not know ANYTHING about computers. Here Here. -- Eric Myers "Frankie say '\relax'" Center for Relativity, Department of Physics, University of Texas at Austin myers@emx.utexas.edu | myers@utaphy.bitnet | myers@ut-emx.UUCP
shapiro@athos.rutgers.edu (Joel Shapiro) (11/13/90)
This is best answered with an example. Actually the example is in
latex, written several years ago to try to convert some of my
colleagues. Of course, this is for a Physics Department, not an
English Department. TeX was invented for mathematical typesetting, and
if you are not interested in math, it probably isn't the best for you
-------------------------cut here------------------------------
\documentstyle[12pt]{article}
\begin{document}
\title{See What Else \LaTeX\ Can Do}
\author{Joel Shapiro}
\date{April 12, 1987}
\maketitle
\parskip =12pt plus 6pt minus 3pt
\LaTeX\ has a {\tt picture} environment which enables the drawing of
simple pictures. There are two applications which come immediately to
mind.
First, for some purposes \LaTeX\ might replace a draftsman. The
human draftsman of my last paper slipped and let out a professional
secret: while the journals will not accept even the most gorgeous
picture
on paper, they will accept a Xerox copy onto velum, which can be done
by
ordinary high quality Xerox machines. I don't know yet if one can draw
enough in \LaTeX\ make that useful, but I think even simple data plots
might be doable.
Secondly, and less speculatively, this would be super
for exams. The beginning of one is shown on the next page.
\pagebreak
\begin{center}
\makebox[5.5in]{Physics 101\hfill Hour Exam I\hfill\today}
\end{center}
\noindent 1.\
\begin{minipage}[t]{3.25in}
Here is an exam question about a wagon.
I haven't quite figured out what the question is,
but the answers are
\newcounter{ans}
\begin{list}{\alph{ans}}{\usecounter{ans}\setlength{\rightmargin}{\leftmargin}}
\item 1 %see page 114 %
\item $\pi$
\item $\displaystyle\int_0^\infty dx\,\frac{1}{\Gamma(x)}$
\item \setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}\begin{picture}(50,23)
\put(0,9){exp}
\put(5,0){G}
\put(23.5,0){H}
\put(5,16){$\cal G$}
\put(23.5,16){$\cal H$}
\put(8,1){\vector(1,0){14}}
\put(8,17){\vector(1,0){14}}
\put(7,15){\vector(0,-1){11}}
\put(25,15){\vector(0,-1){11}}
\put(15,3){j}
\put(15,20){dj}
\put(18,9){exp}
\put(35,9){is commuting}
\end{picture}
\item None of the above.
\end{list}
\end{minipage}
\mbox{\ }
\newcounter{cms}
\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
\begin{picture}(50,0)(0,39)
\put(0,7){\makebox(0,0)[bl]{cm}} %mostly from p 197
\multiput(10,7)(10,0){5}{\addtocounter{cms}{1}
\makebox(0,0)[b]{\arabic{cms}}}
\put(15,20){\circle{6}}
\put(30,20){\circle{6}}
\put(15,20){\circle*{2}}
\put(30,20){\circle*{2}}
\put(10,24){\framebox(25,8){wagon}}
\put(10,32){\vector(-2,1){10}}
\multiput(1,0)(1,0){49}{\line(0,1){2.5}}
\multiput(5,0)(10,0){5}{\line(0,1){3.5}}
\thicklines
\put(0,0){\line(1,0){50}}
\multiput(0,0)(10,0){6}{\line(0,1){5}}
\put(0,16.5){\line(1,0){40}} %added by me
\put(3,37){F} %added by me
\end{picture}
\mbox{\ }
\noindent 2. Here is the next question \ldots.
Question 1.\ should be interesting, {\it n'est-ce pas}?
Note this is all pure \LaTeX, nothing pasted on or inserted
in PostScript. The wagon with its ruler takes about 20 lines of code.
\end{document}eijkhout@s41.csrd.uiuc.edu (Victor Eijkhout) (11/13/90)
yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) writes: >Well How do i Look up stuff in 'TugBoat' I know it's a TeX magazine >but i've never seen it at any news stands. I presume this is in response to something I posted although you don't quote me? I would suspect that most universities libraries have TUGboat somewhere. If yours hasn't (or if your not at a university ) send me your real address. >What does LaTeX stand for. (Lay Mans Tex?) La are the first two letters of 'Lamport', who wrote the package. >oh yea. What's AMStex. (sp) I saw a Book for it but diden't get it. American Mathematical Society. Rather an old package, mainly more powerful for inputting mathematical expressions than plain TeX. >What's the "wildest" "wierdest" thing anyone has Done with Tex? It seems the game of life has been implemented in TeX, and there is a BASIC interpretor in TeX. People write macros for chess and bridge: your macro calls are the moves, and whenever you say something like \showboard you get the current layout of the board or the hands. Victor.
yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) (11/13/90)
Well I Would like to know more about the TugBoat Mag. I don't think the PU library gets it. (We have a rather sad library system) is it too much to ask for a "total" listing of the FTp places that have Tex information/programs. Several people have been asking ME for a list and i only knew of 2 places. (Ps:in the list show the time zone so no one is Ftp'ing during Prime time) -- yorkw@ecn.purdue.edu Willis F York ---------------------------------------------- Macintosh... Proof that a Person can use a Computer all day and still not know ANYTHING about computers.
eijkhout@s41.csrd.uiuc.edu (Victor Eijkhout) (11/14/90)
shapiro@athos.rutgers.edu (Joel Shapiro) writes: >[...] TeX was invented for mathematical typesetting, and >if you are not interested in math, it probably isn't the best for you I have to disagree strongly! The quality of typesetting is (as far as I have seen) unsurpassed by any of the `user-friendly' systems. It is the final output that counts, not the ease of inputting, and TeX definitely wins in this respect. And even considering ease of inputting: because you can automate almost anything in TeX it is in that respect also superior to wysiwyg packages. Now I agree that there are some applications where TeX is less suitable, but these are not the majority of applications. I know lots of people in linguistics, history, and other not mathematical sciences who would not be willing to give up TeX for any other package! Victor.
amanda@visix.com (Amanda Walker) (11/14/90)
In article <1990Nov13.171436.21143@csrd.uiuc.edu> eijkhout@s41.csrd.uiuc.edu (Victor Eijkhout) writes: >I know lots of people in linguistics, history, and other >not mathematical sciences who would not be willing to give >up TeX for any other package! For that matter, I've typeset magazine issues with LaTeX. It was a very pleasant experience. That being said, I wouldn't use TeX for a visual design task (like laying out an ad or putting together a complex brochure). However, for things that involve non-trivial amounts of text, I keep coming back to it. I wouldn't use anything else for books or manuals. -- Amanda Walker amanda@visix.com Visix Software Inc. ...!uunet!visix!amanda -- "I was born in Iowa--I just *work* in outer space" --Star Trek IV
ken@csis.dit.csiro.au (Ken Yap) (11/16/90)
>English Department. TeX was invented for mathematical typesetting, and >if you are not interested in math, it probably isn't the best for you This is not true. I use *TeX a lot for normal formatting needs like letters and papers, most of which don't even have a whiff of mathematical symbols. People who spit out typeset copy from databases also find TeX very useful as the formatting engine. The initial learning costs of TeX are higher than a plain old word processor but if document reuse and style customization is the name of your game, give TeX a go.
myers@ut-emx.uucp (Eric Myers) (11/16/90)
In article <1990Nov16.002618.5885@csis.dit.csiro.au> ken@csis.dit.csiro.au (Ken Yap) writes: >>English Department. TeX was invented for mathematical typesetting, and >>if you are not interested in math, it probably isn't the best for you > >This is not true. I use *TeX a lot for normal formatting needs like >letters and papers, most of which don't even have a whiff of >mathematical symbols. I wrote the TeXsis macro package for typesetting physics papers, but learned afterwards that one physicist's wife had used it to typeset her Ph.D. thesis -- in English Literature, I think. TeX is useful for mathematics, but it's useful for more mundane typesetting jobs as well. -- Eric Myers "Frankie say '\relax'" Center for Relativity, Department of Physics, University of Texas at Austin myers@emx.utexas.edu | myers@utaphy.bitnet | myers@ut-emx.UUCP
eijkhout@s41.csrd.uiuc.edu (Victor Eijkhout) (11/17/90)
myers@ut-emx.uucp (Eric Myers) writes: >In article <1990Nov16.002618.5885@csis.dit.csiro.au> >ken@csis.dit.csiro.au (Ken Yap) writes: >>>English Department. TeX was invented for mathematical typesetting, and >>>if you are not interested in math, it probably isn't the best for you >> >>This is not true. I use *TeX a lot for normal formatting needs like >>letters and papers, most of which don't even have a whiff of >>mathematical symbols. >I wrote the TeXsis macro package for typesetting physics papers, >but learned afterwards that one physicist's wife had used it to >typeset her Ph.D. thesis -- in English Literature, I think. >TeX is useful for mathematics, but it's useful for more mundane >typesetting jobs as well. And don't forget that there are typesetting jobs that are by no means mundane, and still not mathematical. TeX's font mechanism lends itself to other weird symbols than just math. For instance there is a package ChemStruct that will do arbitrary length carbon atom chains (sorry, don't know where to get it), and in non-western languages or western languages with letters different from our ordinary alphabet TeX is also very popular. I know of two people who tackled the problem of Hebrew, including mixing left-right and right-left writing in one paragraph. Also read the article on the old-Icelandic dictionary that is being made with TeX, at a fraction of the costs that it would take with traditional equipment. Victor.
massa@uni-paderborn.de (Michael Janich) (11/17/90)
yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) writes: > b) That can ya do with TeX that ya can't with <insert Prog name here> With TeX you can do EVERYTHING, with <insert Prog name here> not. >2) How advanced is the "macro" ability, and what's a good way to prove this. See LaTeX. Powerfull! > a) Why is TeX better then WORD (Ick) >4) Why is TeX better then Troff or Nroff. Nobody how knows TeX would answer such a question! There is *NO* possibility to compare such programs. >----- >yorkw@ecn.purdue.edu >-- >yorkw@ecn.purdue.edu Willis F York >---------------------------------------------- >Macintosh... Proof that a Person can use a Computer all day and still >not know ANYTHING about computers. Michael Janich, Uni Paderborn, United Germany TeXguru -- Michael Janich, Uni Paderborn, United Germany
gutierrez@noc.arc.nasa.gov (Robert Michael Gutierrez) (11/17/90)
yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) writes: > 1) Why is a "Language" like program soo much better then a WYSIYUG program > a) Why is TeX better then WORD (Ick) Actually, TeX is not "better than WORD," per se, since WORD is a word processing program. TeX is not a word processor, but a typesetting program (yes, I'm being *very* general here, so no flames!!!). > b) That can ya do with TeX that ya can't with <insert Prog name here> Automate typeseeting routines (with a good macro) that would take too much time in a standard WYSIYUG program. See Macros below... > 2) How advanced is the "macro" ability, and what's a good way to prove this. A good, well written macro literally does magic. I currently use a macro writen by Na Choon Piaw (currently at Cal Berkeley) to typeset television scripts. The scripts themselves are fairly simple, but the macro process automates it so well, it just makes life so much easier (centering character's names, formatting dialogue, easy insertion of footnotes, page justification of character/dialogue flow, etc...). Sure, I can do this in Framemaker or Ventura (which I use both), but it sure isn't automated. Just having the 'style sheet' does not make a script in Frame or Ventura. If you want to see any of the scripts used, ftp to network.ucsd.edu, and cd to 'anime/nsipo-archives'. The macro itself is called 'scmac202.tex', and the scripts have the .tex extension. > 4) Why is TeX better then Troff or Nroff. > (dvi files for one) Portable. TeX is available for almost any platform. I use the Unix, MS-DOS and Amiga versions, and have a Laserjet-II at home. Same output as the PS-Jet here at work. > 5) What's this about DVI files and professional typsetting machines. DVI = DeVice Independent. Whatever you have as your output device, the DVI file will use that device's resolution, whatever it may be. [p.s...has anybody used a service facility that supported DVI on a Lino???] > Macintosh... Proof that a Person can use a Computer all day and still > not know ANYTHING about computers. There's even TeX for the Macintoys...err...Macintrashes...uhhh...Macintoasters..... Robert Gutierrez $B%m!<%P%H!&%0%F%#%(%l%:(J
evan@telly.on.ca (Evan Leibovitch) (11/18/90)
In article <1990Nov16.002618.5885@csis.dit.csiro.au> ken@csis.dit.csiro.au (Ken Yap) writes: >I use *TeX a lot for normal formatting needs like >letters and papers, most of which don't even have a whiff of >mathematical symbols. >People who spit out typeset copy from databases also find TeX very >useful as the formatting engine. Amen on that last point. I don't know of a single database company's report writer that can handle proportionally-spaced type or font switching easily, and certainly not in a manner that's easily portable between output devices. I have written report scripts in both Empress and Progress which create LaTeX output. Their output looks better and more flexible than anything I could do with the report scripts alone. -- Evan Leibovitch, Sound Software, located in beautiful Brampton, Ontario evan@telly.on.ca / uunet!attcan!telly!evan / (416) 452-0504 Keep an open mind -- you'll never know what might fall in.
urban@randvax.UUCP (Mike Urban) (11/20/90)
One class of advantage of TeX or LaTeX over WYSIWYG systems like
Microsoft Word or FrameMaker can broadly be termed `deferred formatting
decisions.' TeX's macro facility is important for this. Rather than
trying to explain what I mean, let me give some examples. I am not an
expert in WYSIWYG systems, but am given to understand that these
systems provide only limited ability to address such problems.
1. I write a paper about some Unix(tm) software package. I refer
to `Unix' several times in the paper. I think that Unix should
be spelled as UNIX, in all caps, but am not sure. I use a macro,
\Unix, which I define as UNIX at the top of my paper. Later, I
realize that I want the `U' as a big cap, and the `nix' in smaller
caps, with a little kerning between them. I change the macro. Oh yes,
the first time the macro is used, it is clever, and adds a footnote
containing Trademark information.
2. In the paper, I refer to programs like `ls' and `rm'. I use
a macro \progname{ls}, and only later decide that it should be
italics (or is it boldface).
3. I write a paper on card games like Bridge. I need diagrams
that show hands for four players. I come up with a syntax for
describing each hand, and implement a macro (or I steal one from recent
TuGBoat articles). Just when I get it right, my publisher tells me
that the four hands should be labeled one thru four, rather than North,
South, etc. I have twenty of these diagrams, but I only need to modify
one macro definition.
4. I have a presentation for a Usenix conference and need transparencies.
I also want to distribute copies of the transparencies in `miniature'. I
use LaTeX macros for my slides such that `\section' starts a new
slide with an appropriate title. By changing the \documentstyle from
`myslides' (or whatever) to `article', I can print out the same slide
information in more condensed form. By adding an option, I can add
marginal notes to my own article-form copy to use as reminders during
my presentation.
Note that these solutions require a certain discipline to code your TeX
or LaTeX in the body of your text with only the most conservative
assumptions about the final appearance of the output. A WYSIWYG
system, almost by definition, discourages such technique.
Mike
--
Mike Urban
urban@rand.ORGsteve@Advansoft.COM (Steve Savitzky) (11/20/90)
In article <1990Nov17.070321.9995@nas.nasa.gov> gutierrez@noc.arc.nasa.gov (Robert Michael Gutierrez) writes: yorkw@stable.ecn.purdue.edu (Willis F York) writes: > 1) Why is a "Language" like program soo much better then a WYSIYUG program > a) Why is TeX better then WORD (Ick) Actually, TeX is not "better than WORD," per se, since WORD is a word processing program. TeX is not a word processor, but a typesetting program (yes, I'm being *very* general here, so no flames!!!). Let me add to this the fact that because TeX is a pure formatter, it lets you use your own favorite text editor. > b) That can ya do with TeX that ya can't with <insert Prog name here> TeX is very good for tables, equations, and general text. Things like bulleted lists, hanging indent, and so on are trivial. (Which they are not in most word processors.) > 2) How advanced is the "macro" ability, and what's a good way to prove this. It is possible to write macros that draw pictures and graphs. I once wrote a set of macros that interpreted the syntax of a little window- definition language we were using locally, so that I could incorporate window descriptions from actual programs into documentation as illustrations. Try that in your word processor! TeX's macros have all the power of a general-purpose programming language (though the syntax is on the weird side). > 4) Why is TeX better then Troff or Nroff. > (dvi files for one) Troff and Nroff macros are neither especially readable nor especially writeable (I have written Nroff macro packages). They have a very restricted syntax, little mnemonic power (1- and 2-character names), and many stupid restrictions. TeX macros can be named by arbitrary identifiers, can specify the delimiters for their arguments, and can appear anywhere in a document. -- \ --Steve Savitzky-- \ ADVANsoft Research Corp \ REAL hackers use an AXE! \ \ steve@advansoft.COM \ 4301 Great America Pkwy \ #include<disclaimer.h> \ \ arc!steve@apple.COM \ Santa Clara, CA 95954 \ 408-727-3357 \ \__ steve@arc.UUCP _________________________________________________________
wjw@eba.eb.ele.tue.nl (Willem Jan Withagen) (12/07/90)
Lots of people wrote why TeX is great. I like that, my boss doesn't. He's a WYSISWYG-bozo, but once in a while needs to be stimulated to let me keep TeX. I'm shure that my question is shared by many others: I would like a copy of the article that is being destilled from all answers. This is on the net because I lost the article asking for replies. But if I remember right was it somebody needing a topic to write about. Some it could be a very nice article. Thanx Willem Jan Withagen Eindhoven University of Technology DomainName: wjw@eb.ele.tue.nl Digital Systems Group, Room EH 10.10 BITNET: ELEBWJ@HEITUE5.BITNET P.O. 513 Tel: +31-40-473401 5600 MB Eindhoven The Netherlands