Sorry
I didnot notice the reply-to was not the list.
John O'Gorman
--- Begin Message ---
>From - Fri Jul 22 15:39:50 2005
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2005 15:39:49 +1200
From: John O'Gorman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204
X-Accept-Language: en-us
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Jean-Marc Lasgouttes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Heretical question?
References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
IMHO, LyX is better because of WYSIWYM:
1. Even on fast computers it takes a long time to compile a big
document. 5 passes are needed if you have TOCs, indexes, citations, and
cross-references.
2. Freedom from the constraint of having to match the print output
layout allows you to use screen fonts suited to screen resolution
limitations (relatively coarse bitmaps). And the LyX layout engine
tailors the layout to the screen geometry. You can arbitrarily change
the window dimensions - and LyX will re-arrange the layout to fit the
changed dimensions. The LateX engine can then deal with high quality
print fonts separately.
3. There are things that LyX cannot do in the screen window (like multi
columns and mini-pages) and need not try to do. You just trust LaTeX do
get it right later.
All of the above makes it easier to use LyX. You focus entirely on content.
You can literally achieve effortless superiority with total ignorance of
the LaTeX language.
Effortless superiority and total ignorance are what made the British
Empire great!
regards
John O'Gorman
--- End Message ---
