Public SourceMage Discussion List

["Mathieu Lonjaret" <lejatorn AT smgl.homelinux.net>]

I love LaTeX and use it for most of my docs, but I think it would be
a mistake to impose it on possible contributors.  We should at least
leave the choice to the doc writer whether or not he wants to write in
plaintext, wiki syntax, or LaTeX (or troff!).
Then it could be up to the Tome Lead (hehe, sorry ryuji) or some delegate
of him to format it to whatever final language we adopt.

Cheers,
Mathieu

--- Begin Message ---

• From: seth AT swoolley.homeip.net
• To: Jaka Kranjc <smgl AT lynxlynx.info>
• Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
• Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Tome nominations
• Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2008 02:43:06 -0700

I'm going to top-post just because I'm doing a general response.

A wiki with extremely simple tex syntax would rock.

But let's remember, guys, you can convert whatever wiki syntax into tex
for the nice kerning and layout it does later.

On Tue, Sep 02, 2008 at 10:32:39AM +0200, Jaka Kranjc wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 of September 2008 10:08:12 Remko van der Vossen wrote:
> > I would very much be in favour of LaTeX documentation, there
> > are quite a number of tools to create other forms from the LaTeX (html
> > single page, multi page and framed, man pages, texinfo pages and txt) in
> > addition to the regular dvi, ps and pdf.
> There is no wiki with inherent latex syntax afaik. Without a wiki, we lose
> public colaborative editing, don't we? A BLOCKER as any.
>
> > I feel LaTeX is many times more transparent than wiki markup, I mean,
> > what's easier to understand \textbf{foobar} or '''foobar'''. It will
> > only take a little to realise bf stands for boldface and once you know
> > it you won't forget it because of the clear contextual link. In the case
> > of wiki markup however I have to look up the insane markup each and and
> > every time. And is most definately something that is holding me back
> > from contributing more to the wiki/documentation.
> This is moinmoin's fault, some other wikis have a much more sensible syntax
> ('''''for bold italic''''' is so ancient). moinmoin also has the help
> spread
> out in various pages and there is no way to see the site map afaik.
> LaTeX isn't that transparent either. Ok, we could have a quick reference
> page
> with all the common syntax, but imagine all the escaping / environments we
> would need. If you use ^ (eg. repair files) or _ (every second spell file)
> mathmode is turned on and things get formatted as equations.
>
> And sure, it can do custom commands, includes and quadratic wheels, but do
> we
> really need that?
>
> LP
> --
> We cannot command nature except by obeying her. --Sir Francis Bacon
> Have a sourcerous day! www.sourcemage.org



> _______________________________________________
> SM-Discuss mailing list
> SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss


--
Seth Alan Woolley Pacific Green Candidate for Secretary of State
http://seth4sos.org/
State Coordinating Committee Member
Secretary and Parliamentarian Senior Software Engineer
2008 Elections Administrator Rich Map Compiler and Engine
Pacific Green Party of Oregon deCarta: Powering LBS Solutions

IANAL (I am not a lawyer!) TINLA (This is not legal advice!)

3403 NE Stanton St gnupg.org key 84317E6A = http://swoolley.org/
Portland, OR 97212 8C97 9818 F889 EDE3 B54C Cell: (503) 953-3943
USA, 97212-2744 03 AAD6 E936 BF83 8431 7E6A 45.5438 N 122.6295 W
_______________________________________________
SM-Discuss mailing list
SM-Discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/sm-discuss
--- End Message ---