bhutex wrote:
I don't really understand why this discussion.
Have not you read the article in TUG Boat. Don is planning to bring out a new
TeX called iTeX*. Actually the * is a sound of bell - ding!!
But it may not be free. But it can handle all types of output formats, all
languages etc.
I don't really understand why this discussion.
Have not you read the article in TUG Boat. Don is planning to bring out a
new TeX called iTeX*. Actually the * is a sound of bell - ding!!
But it may not be free. But it can handle all types of output formats, all
languages etc. etc. Don presented th
> Yet, it remains one of the most
> powerful and cheapest typesetting systems to date.
"Cheap" in terms of initial investment -- surely, as it's open-source
and free.
"Cheap" in terms of implementing -- not quite so, because you need to
format your sources in a very specific, "isolated" syntax.
On Nov 18, 2011, at 7:57 AM, Arthur Reutenauer wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:16:31AM +0100, Keith J. Schultz wrote in
> reply to Ross Moore:
>> You are probably a little young to know this, but TeX's original output
>> format was a dvi file.
>
> I think I'll have this one framed and
On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 10:16:31AM +0100, Keith J. Schultz wrote in
reply to Ross Moore:
> You are probably a little young to know this, but TeX's original output
> format was a dvi file.
I think I'll have this one framed and sent to Ross for his next
birthday.
Arthur
-
2011/11/18 Keith J. Schultz :
> Hi All,
> Sorry, I go OT here, but in order to debate it is necessary.
> Please forgive.
Hi all,
I agree with Keith, I have just a few comments.
> I have to side more with Philip.
> What most are forgetting is what (Xe)TeX is intended for.
> It is for most a typese
Hi All,
Sorry, I go OT here, but in order to debate it is necessary.
Please forgive.
I have to side more with Philip.
What most are forgetting is what (Xe)TeX is intended for.
It is for most a typesetting program(you do mention this below).
It was not designed to handle different languages or ac
