Re: Word processors [was Re: Phonemes]

Peter T. Daniels wrote:

So you've never been the person responsible for having a work you've
(co)written go to the publisher, be copyedited, and be typeset.

For that procedure, a robust and universal system is needed -- MSWord
has emerged as the standard, and some still swear by WordPerfect. (I've
never had occasion to use the mathematics tools in Word and have no idea
how good its output is;

Wretched, if not worse. To say nothing (which is plenty) of its input. Imagine replacing IPA by chiselling spectrographs by hand in slate with a bar of soap, then you're maybe approaching the ball park of the difference. LaTeX is the standard in the discipline for precisely that reason.


FrameMaker has a math-setting system that
appears to be easier to use than Word's, but again I have no idea how
well the output turns out.)

Not especially well in the examples I know I've seen, but they may well not have been optimal.

The amount of hand-tuning you and others describe as being involved in
using LaTex makes it entirely unsuitable for submitting manuscripts for
publication in the usual way.

Journals typically publish their own set of style files, and authors are expected to use (only) them. LaTeX works for what it does; it's only really when what it does isn't what you want that it gets profoundly unpleasant, and since publishers' wishes trump authors', that isn't a big problem for journal articles.

All my pubished academic work has been submitted via the publisher's LaTeX workflow, and I've been sent their proofs and all that and everything.

If you're submitting camera-ready copy, then you remove all
responsibility for the content and its appearance from the publisher,
and the extreme ugliness of -- what did you call it, Computer Modern? --
the default LaTeX font speaks very ill of the consideration of AMS
members for their readers.

Computer Modern isn't compulsory, and alternatives to it are a question for the publisher. The mainstream journals in maths and physics don't all look wretched, and so far as I know they do all accept LaTeX submissions. It just plain _is_ the industry standard in the field, despite its many deficiencies for other purposes.

I didn't really start to resent it properly until I had to switch to writing essays and assigments that didn't fit with its default document styles and (especially) using Harvard-style citations.

Des
still uses it, but swears more
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: installing new packages under mactex and texshop
    ... possible to set up Babel to default to UK English hyphenation. ... In the defence of the LaTeX ... I am generating a standard LaTeX format that typesets documents the same ...
    (comp.text.tex)
  • Re: Is there an official list of bibtex entry fields?
    ... Standard entry types ... A book with an explicit publisher. ... Abbreviations are provided for many journals. ...
    (comp.text.tex)
  • Re: Dealing with publishers
    ... be firmer in obtaining a useful source LaTeX files. ... They sent the publisher full LaTeX source (using a LaTeX template ... After completion of the production process, ...
    (comp.text.tex)
  • Re: Exporting fonts (was Re: unicode fonts (Word 2004))
    ... > fonts or font sizes for headings, etc. I've done enough books that I ... Gentium was a pleasant surprise to me too. ... On the other hand a university publisher would prefer LaTeX surely? ...
    (microsoft.public.mac.office.word)
  • Re: The Problems of TeX
    ... I'd call disabling babel quite exotic. ... If your definition of "not exotic" is "everything that was standard x ... Creating a new format just to avoid a single line of source code, ... I've created a standard LaTeX format using standard parts, ...
    (comp.text.tex)