pocallaghan at gmail.com
Thu Mar 7 21:27:49 UTC 2013
On Thu, 2013-03-07 at 11:07 -0800, Joe Zeff wrote:
> On 03/07/2013 10:56 AM, Patrick O'Callaghan wrote:
> > That might work for some projects, but generally speaking people using
> > TeX/LaTeX are concerned about finer control of typesetting, especially
> > when it comes to mathematical material. TeX/LaTeX is the gold standard
> > for this. To paraphrase Brian Kernighan, the trouble with WYSIWYG is
> > that it usually means What You See Is*All* You Get.
> You may find this interesting, then. PDF files created by Scribus are
> considerably larger than those created by Adobe. This is because Adobe
> sets the position for a line, then inserts a string of characters for
> that line. Scribus sets the position for each character as it goes.
> That makes very precise positioning of specific elements possible, far
> more than in Adobe. Of course, it takes work to learn how to do this (I
> haven't, as I don't need it.) and to get it right. However, if you're
> happy using TeX, and it does what you want the way you want, that's all
> that's important, isn't it?
Not really sure why you're bringing in Adobe. TeX/LaTeX have nothing to
do with PDF (sure, they can optionally generate PDF output, but that's
not the point).
What I was really getting at is that TeX/LaTeX has a widely accepted
encoding for mathematical material, plus an extremely sophisticated
typesetting algorithm that makes it looks nice. No other tool even comes
close (GUI or not).
More information about the users