[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Groff] Mission statement, second draft

From: Anton Shterenlikht
Subject: Re: [Groff] Mission statement, second draft
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 06:44:53 -0700 (PDT)

>To: address@hidden
>Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 13:06:29 +0000
>From: Ralph Corderoy <address@hidden>
>I read _The TeXbook_ and returned to troff.  The input language of troff
>is superior for mark-up that doesn't clutter the prose, e.g. often small

Nobody I know of uses raw tex nowadays.
I'd advise against reading The TeXbook.
For people who just want to get their
standard technical/scientific documents
prepared I'd suggest recent books on
latex by Kopka and Daly, Goossens,
Mittelbach, Rahtz, Grätzer, etc.

I claim it is a lot quicker, for a first
year Mech Eng UG student, who was force
fed MS stuff only, prior to coming to us,
to make a standard lab report in latex
than in groff. By standard, I mean:
sections, tables, figures, bibliography
and cross-referencing for all of these.

I'm not saying anything against groff
at all.  My point is that IMO modern
latex is the easiest route for new users
to prepare standard technical documents.
The authors need know nothing about raw
tex at all.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]