Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 23:28:55 -0700 From: Sandy Rutherford <sandy@krvarr.bc.ca> To: Roland Smith <rsmith@xs4all.nl> Cc: Florian Hengstberger <e0025265@student.tuwien.ac.at> Subject: Re: tetex, latex, dvips Message-ID: <17033.36647.195132.991488@szamoca.krvarr.bc.ca> In-Reply-To: <20050516215544.GA1693@slackbox.xs4all.nl> References: <iglpiy.orf7m0@webmail.tuwien.ac.at> <20050516212544.GA1539@slackbox.xs4all.nl> <iglqfw.solypb@webmail.tuwien.ac.at> <20050516215544.GA1693@slackbox.xs4all.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>>>>> On Mon, 16 May 2005 23:55:44 +0200, >>>>> Roland Smith <rsmith@xs4all.nl> said: > LaTeX3 (if it is ever finished) will be integrated into the different > distributions. OTOH, even Leslie Lamport seems to think that LaTeX will > fall into disuse in about five years. The consensus seems to be that ConTeXt > is the most modern TeX macro package. I find this hard to believe. There is simply too much scientific publishing infrastructure invested into LaTeX for the AMS, APS, Springer-Verlag, and others to make the shift without a good reason. There are literally 100's of LaTeX compatible packages for specialised scientific typesetting (commutative diagrams, Feynman diagrams, etc) that would need to be rewritten. Sandy
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?17033.36647.195132.991488>