paper-machine comments on Call for volunteers: Publishing the Sequences - Less Wrong

13 Post author: wedrifid 28 June 2012 03:08PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (42)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: [deleted] 29 June 2012 01:30:48AM 0 points [-]

Sure, and any good (human) editor should have a macro package for working in such a way. I'm saying that LaTeX just makes it much harder to work like that, effectively.

Comment author: wedrifid 29 June 2012 02:24:30PM 0 points [-]

Sure, and any good (human) editor should have a macro package for working in such a way. I'm saying that LaTeX just makes it much harder to work like that, effectively.

It sure does. LaTeX is kind of a ridiculous hack. The semantics aren't even consistent. I kind of wish there was a mature publishing system based of DRYML.

Comment author: [deleted] 29 June 2012 02:26:28PM 0 points [-]

You and I both. Unfortunately any competing system has a nearly insurmountable barrier to entry. Kind of "Worse is Better" taken to insane extremes.

Comment author: wedrifid 29 June 2012 02:29:01PM 0 points [-]

Unfortunately any competing system has a nearly insurmountable barrier to entry.

The best approach would be to build something completely backwards compatible. That is, it allows easy embedding of LaTeX code and optionally compiles out to .tex.

Comment author: [deleted] 29 June 2012 08:28:58PM 0 points [-]

I think I disagree, but it would depend on implementation details.

One possibility I can see is that you keep around a copy of the LaTeX distribution to parse these easily embedded LaTeX fragments, something like LuaTeX might someday turn out to be. In that case, you're still stuck supporting LaTeX's monstrosity of a toolchain. In that case, there's still e.g. no LaTeX on the iPad.

Another possibility is that you rewrite the LaTeX engine ... ah, nevermind, this isn't a possibility.