Jeremy Shaw wrote:
I would be especially neat if there was some way to embed the .tex
source in the .pdf, so that you could later extract the source from
the .pdf and rebuild it. This is probably not officially supported by
.pdf, but I bet it can be done. Perhaps by creating a hidden section
and
Hi Peter,
Yes, but why don't researchers just publish their TEX file? You can
regard that as the source code for generating PDF/PS whatever no?
Building a .tex file can be rather hard with packages and what-not,
plus quite a few of us use lhst2tex as a preprocessor. It's not
impossible, but
You are completely right, 99% of the people will read the PDF, in
exactly the same sense that Windows users prefer to download an
installable EXE instead of building from source.
But nobody here will argue that the *option* to build from source is
useful no? So I don't see why this would not
Hi Peter,
Yes, but why don't researchers just publish their TEX file? You can
regard that as the source code for generating PDF/PS whatever no?
Building a .tex file can be rather hard with packages and what-not,
plus quite a few of us use lhst2tex as a preprocessor. It's not
impossible, but
Building a .tex file can be rather hard with packages and what-not,
plus quite a few of us use lhst2tex as a preprocessor. It's not
impossible, but its not trivial either, and I can't imagine that
anyone would use a .tex over a PDF.
I would prefer the .tex version any day! Why not have both
also, Latex source code is 100% accessible to screen reader users.
Paul
You are completely right, 99% of the people will read the PDF, in
exactly the same sense that Windows users prefer to download an
installable EXE instead of building from source.
But nobody here will argue that the
Christopher L Conway wrote:
style is attached (I'm sure many on the list already have it), in case
Peter is feeling brave. Note that the ACM has several different
I'm feeling brave but tired ;-) Besides I'm spending all of my free time learning Haskell! :) I don't know tex at all, I just
At Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:10:38 +0100,
Peter Verswyvelen wrote:
Yes, but why don't researchers just publish their TEX file? You can
regard that as the source code for generating PDF/PS whatever no?
Yes. but things have a way of getting lost. The primary advantage to
embedding the data is you
Peter Verswyvelen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Most research papers have the same layout: two columns per A4
page. They mostly come as PDF or PS.
I think it is (more and more) common these days for journals to
publish an HTML version on their web site. Otherwise I'd suggest
e-mailing the author
At Mon, 19 Nov 2007 19:57:14 +,
Neil Mitchell wrote:
All these PDF's are produced from a standard Latex class file. For
all my papers I have the original source .tex files. I suspect
you'll have more luck going from the original .tex rather than the
PDF.
I would be especially neat if
Most research papers have the same layout: two columns per A4 page. They
mostly come as PDF or PS.
Although this is standard, it is not really accessible for people with
people with bad vision, who prefer larger fonts. When you print this,
the fonts are rather small. For those people, a
Hi Peter,
Although this is standard, it is not really accessible for people with
people with bad vision, who prefer larger fonts. When you print this, the
fonts are rather small. For those people, a reflowable PDF would make much
more sense, so they can choose how big the fonts are on screen
Why don't you typeset the whole thing in Latex. That way you'll
definitely ensure accessibility.
Cheers
Paul
At 19:43 19/11/2007, you wrote:
Most research papers have the same layout: two columns per A4 page.
They mostly come as PDF or PS.
Although this is standard, it is not really
13 matches
Mail list logo
