On 13 Aug 2002, David Kastrup wrote:
> Allan Rae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
> > Actually, I'd rather you showed both the preview and the editing
> > much as is shown for Whizzy-TeX (even though that would almost be
> > repeating Figure 6).
>
> Yes, figure 6 is supposed to show the various states a preview can be
> in. Figure 7 shows a typical _single_ editing situation. When you
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Exactly -- except it doesn't show the editing situation for
preview-latex.
> use WhizzyTeX, _both_ windows are active at once and are part of the
> editing situation. With preview-latex, it is either open or closed.
> One could only ponder whether one would try to make a screen shot
> with one open and a different closed preview.
That might be a better and fairer option.
> > The description of TeXmacs and LyX left me thinking LyX was newer
> > than TeXmacs when the opposite is true. Not really a problem just
> > an impression.
>
> Hm. Where does the impression arise? Actually, I would not even
> know which of the two was younger.
I think it was just the ordering of the two texts and then comparing
LyX to TeXmacs (ie. using TeXmacs as a reference) that gave the
impression TeXmacs was an older if not more mature product. No big
deal.
> > Otherwise I like it.
>
> Actually, it _is_ amazing and nice how many different approaches are
> already flying around. You get a lot of choice (and in case of Emacs,
> if you are unsatiable you can use all of the presented tools for it at
> once).
The biggest problem people will face is which to choose. Your paper
does give a pretty good overview.
Allan. (ARRae)
