in the intervening quarter of a century LaTeX3 has been a work in progress. In any event, LaTeX moved on from the original set of macros in 1983 to LaTeX 2.09 (anybody know when?) to LaTeX 2e in 1994. If LaTeX3 wants to engage this crowd, it'd better offer substantial benefits, a fair amount of backward compatibility, or preferably both. Traditional, static documents will never go extinct, particularly in fields such as pure mathematics. It's a great page for the history books - but, it's not the future. It also continues to be useful for many purposes, especially due to its widescale adoption from this bright history. Of course, credit to where credit is due: LaTeX was a hugely powerful tool that's done a lot of good in the world. The future is in interactive documents (e.g., in the direction of ), not statically compiling plaintext to image-like documents. Personally, though, my main criticism of LaTeX is that its logic is static and based in plaintext. on many StackExchange sites (at least the TeX subset via MathJax), but it's too limited to be held up as a standard to move toward.įor a discussion of some of its limitations and things that can be improved: (1999). It's useful because it's a standardized language everyone knows and can be applied across the web, e.g. LaTeX should be regarded as a legacy technology, not the future. There's plenty of things to complain about LaTeX, but these aren't the challenges I face. But I'm honestly confused at the complaints. I'd gladly lend a hand (LaTeX is far from trivial) and I'd like to learn from others. Honestly I'm curious what issues you face.
I'm actually curious what you're doing that causes this.
0 kommentar(er)
