Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Am 05.04.2009, 00:46 Uhr, schrieb Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com: If it's longer than 5 pages, I use LyX or Komposer (a WYSIWYG HTML editor). Sorry, Steve, do you mean »kompozer« http://www.kompozer.net/ or Nvu - HTML-Editor (for Windows) or Nvu Composer (for several OSs) or something

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess. In fact I never managed to figure out how to copy and paste content from two different versions

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Tuesday 07 April 2009 07:32:03 am Joachim Osnabryg wrote: Am 05.04.2009, 00:46 Uhr, schrieb Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com: If it's longer than 5 pages, I use LyX or Komposer (a WYSIWYG HTML editor). Sorry, Steve, do you mean ÂģkompozerÂĢ http://www.kompozer.net/ =THIS or Nvu -

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Am 05.04.2009, 00:46 Uhr, schrieb Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com: If it's longer than 5 pages, I use LyX or Komposer (a WYSIWYG HTML editor). Sorry, Steve, do you mean »kompozer« http://www.kompozer.net/ or Nvu - HTML-Editor (for Windows) or Nvu Composer (for several OSs) or something

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess. In fact I never managed to figure out how to copy and paste content from two different versions

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Tuesday 07 April 2009 07:32:03 am Joachim Osnabryg wrote: Am 05.04.2009, 00:46 Uhr, schrieb Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com: If it's longer than 5 pages, I use LyX or Komposer (a WYSIWYG HTML editor). Sorry, Steve, do you mean ÂģkompozerÂĢ http://www.kompozer.net/ =THIS or Nvu -

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Am 05.04.2009, 00:46 Uhr, schrieb Steve Litt : If it's longer than 5 pages, I use LyX or Komposer (a WYSIWYG HTML editor). Sorry, Steve, do you mean »kompozer« http://www.kompozer.net/ or Nvu - HTML-Editor (for Windows) or Nvu Composer (for several OSs) or something

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

> > In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several > > people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up > > like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess. In fact I never managed > > to figure out how to copy and paste content from two different

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Tuesday 07 April 2009 07:32:03 am Joachim Osnabryg wrote: > Am 05.04.2009, 00:46 Uhr, schrieb Steve Litt > : > > If it's longer > than 5 pages, I use LyX or Komposer (a WYSIWYG HTML editor). > > Sorry, Steve, do you mean > ÂģkompozerÂĢ http://www.kompozer.net/

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most reasonable solution for collaborative text: have everyone use plain text and only futz with formatting when you agree on a final version. It may not look pretty, but it's efficient. This does not work for

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 + (UTC) Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.de wrote: On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most reasonable solution for collaborative text: have everyone use plain text and only futz with formatting when you agree

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On 2009-04-06, Typhoon wrote: On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 + (UTC) Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.de wrote: On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most reasonable solution for collaborative text: have everyone use plain text ... This does

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Sunday 05 April 2009 11:06:38 am Rich Shepard wrote: On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Keller wrote: In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess.

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Monday 06 April 2009 03:01:37 am Typhoon wrote: Even emacs outline mode will provide the section structure - used in conjunction with Muse mode, you get a lot of the other stuff as well. VimOutliner (cough cough hint hint) SteveT Steve Litt Recession Relief Package

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 08:15:10 + (UTC) Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.de wrote: On 2009-04-06, Typhoon wrote: On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 + (UTC) Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.de wrote: On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:09:19 -0400 Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com wrote: On Monday 06 April 2009 03:01:37 am Typhoon wrote: Even emacs outline mode will provide the section structure - used in conjunction with Muse mode, you get a lot of the other stuff as well. VimOutliner (cough

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most reasonable solution for collaborative text: have everyone use plain text and only futz with formatting when you agree on a final version. It may not look pretty, but it's efficient. This does not work for

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 + (UTC) Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.de wrote: On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most reasonable solution for collaborative text: have everyone use plain text and only futz with formatting when you agree

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On 2009-04-06, Typhoon wrote: On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 + (UTC) Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.de wrote: On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most reasonable solution for collaborative text: have everyone use plain text ... This does

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Sunday 05 April 2009 11:06:38 am Rich Shepard wrote: On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Keller wrote: In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess.

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Monday 06 April 2009 03:01:37 am Typhoon wrote: Even emacs outline mode will provide the section structure - used in conjunction with Muse mode, you get a lot of the other stuff as well. VimOutliner (cough cough hint hint) SteveT Steve Litt Recession Relief Package

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 08:15:10 + (UTC) Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.de wrote: On 2009-04-06, Typhoon wrote: On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 + (UTC) Guenter Milde mi...@users.berlios.de wrote: On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:09:19 -0400 Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com wrote: On Monday 06 April 2009 03:01:37 am Typhoon wrote: Even emacs outline mode will provide the section structure - used in conjunction with Muse mode, you get a lot of the other stuff as well. VimOutliner (cough

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: >I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most reasonable solution for > collaborative text: have everyone use plain text and only futz with > formatting when you agree on a final version. It may not look pretty, but > it's efficient. This does not work

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 + (UTC) Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: > > >I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most reasonable > > solution for collaborative text: have everyone use plain text and > > only futz with formatting when

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On 2009-04-06, Typhoon wrote: > On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 + (UTC) > Guenter Milde wrote: >> On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: >> >I'm surprised that no one seems to use the most reasonable >> > solution for collaborative text: have everyone use plain text ...

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Sunday 05 April 2009 11:06:38 am Rich Shepard wrote: > On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Keller wrote: > > In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several > > people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up > > like that - A hopelessly tangled

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Monday 06 April 2009 03:01:37 am Typhoon wrote: > Even emacs outline mode will provide the section structure - used in > conjunction with Muse mode, you get a lot of the other stuff as well. VimOutliner (cough cough hint hint) SteveT Steve Litt Recession Relief Package

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 08:15:10 + (UTC) Guenter Milde wrote: > On 2009-04-06, Typhoon wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 + (UTC) > > Guenter Milde wrote: > > >> On 2009-04-05, Rich Shepard wrote: > > >> >I'm surprised that no one

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 10:09:19 -0400 Steve Litt wrote: > On Monday 06 April 2009 03:01:37 am Typhoon wrote: > > Even emacs outline mode will provide the section structure - used in > > conjunction with Muse mode, you get a lot of the other stuff as > > well. > >

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Just the same as I do on the LyX list, I brought up the fact that if you want to, you can do styles based authoring on MS Word just as easily as on TeX or LaTeX or LyX, and in fact I've written a complete book in WordPerfect 5.1 and another in MS Word, using nothing but styles. And of

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

/With Wordperfect, there's Reveal Codes, which allows you to see what's wrong and fix it// Not trying to defend WORD, which has steadily deteriorated from being good to being unusable, but in it you can also see the field codes and correct them, if you know what you are doing. It is ugly, but

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Keller wrote: In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess. In fact I never managed to figure out how to copy and paste

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Sunday 05 April 2009 10:06:38 Rich Shepard wrote: On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Keller wrote: In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess. In

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Just the same as I do on the LyX list, I brought up the fact that if you want to, you can do styles based authoring on MS Word just as easily as on TeX or LaTeX or LyX, and in fact I've written a complete book in WordPerfect 5.1 and another in MS Word, using nothing but styles. And of

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

/With Wordperfect, there's Reveal Codes, which allows you to see what's wrong and fix it// Not trying to defend WORD, which has steadily deteriorated from being good to being unusable, but in it you can also see the field codes and correct them, if you know what you are doing. It is ugly, but

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Keller wrote: In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess. In fact I never managed to figure out how to copy and paste

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Sunday 05 April 2009 10:06:38 Rich Shepard wrote: On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Keller wrote: In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess. In

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

> Just the same as I do on the LyX list, I brought up the fact that if you want > to, you can do styles based authoring on MS Word just as easily as on TeX or > LaTeX or LyX, and in fact I've written a complete book in WordPerfect 5.1 and > another in MS Word, using nothing but styles. And of

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

/With Wordperfect, there's "Reveal Codes", which allows you to see what's wrong and fix it// Not trying to defend WORD, which has steadily deteriorated from being good to being unusable, but in it you can also see the field codes and correct them, if you know what you are doing. It is ugly,

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Keller wrote: In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti mess. In fact I never managed to figure out how to copy and paste

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Sunday 05 April 2009 10:06:38 Rich Shepard wrote: > On Sun, 5 Apr 2009, Wolfgang Keller wrote: > > In fact in collaborative environments (e.g. companies), where several > > people work together on the same document, Word documents _always_ end up > > like that - A hopelessly tangled spaghetti

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Steve Litt sl...@... writes: I'm not really sure I agree that it's as easy to do semantic markup in MS Word is in Latex. There are a number of issues First, it's much easier not to use styles. Personally, I always used styles, but I'm the only one I know how does that. When I put together

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Saturday 04 April 2009 12:57:16 pm Anders Host-Madsen wrote: Steve Litt sl...@... writes: I'm not really sure I agree that it's as easy to do semantic markup in MS Word is in Latex. There are a number of issues First, it's much easier not to use styles. True enough. If Al's fridge has a

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Steve Litt sl...@... writes: I'm not really sure I agree that it's as easy to do semantic markup in MS Word is in Latex. There are a number of issues First, it's much easier not to use styles. Personally, I always used styles, but I'm the only one I know how does that. When I put together

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Saturday 04 April 2009 12:57:16 pm Anders Host-Madsen wrote: Steve Litt sl...@... writes: I'm not really sure I agree that it's as easy to do semantic markup in MS Word is in Latex. There are a number of issues First, it's much easier not to use styles. True enough. If Al's fridge has a

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Steve Litt writes: I'm not really sure I agree that it's as easy to do semantic markup in MS Word is in Latex. There are a number of issues First, it's much easier not to use styles. Personally, I always used styles, but I'm the only one I know how does that. When I put together

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

On Saturday 04 April 2009 12:57:16 pm Anders Host-Madsen wrote: > Steve Litt writes: > > I'm not really sure I agree that it's as easy to do semantic > markup in MS Word is in Latex. There are a number of issues > First, it's much easier not to use styles. True enough. If Al's fridge

LyX vs. wordprocessors

Hi all, Last night, at Greater Orlando Linux User Group (GoLUG), I a gave a presentation on using TeX for simple tasks like printing shipping labels. As you can imagine, this was mostly an anti-Microsoft crowd. Interestingly, several were already TeX or LaTeX users, and several criticized MS

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Hi Steve, I still find myself tweaking LyX formatting a bit at stages closer to finishing of the project writing, but it's just maybe I am not proficient enough with it yet. On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 20:37:56 +0100, Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com wrote: Hi all, Last night, at Greater

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

There's two types of tweaking: With environments and character styles, which I wholeheartedly endorse, and with inline ERT, which I caution against except in the \frontmatter. SteveT On Thursday 02 April 2009 03:51:12 pm Yury Davidouski wrote: Hi Steve, I still find myself tweaking LyX

LyX vs. wordprocessors

Hi all, Last night, at Greater Orlando Linux User Group (GoLUG), I a gave a presentation on using TeX for simple tasks like printing shipping labels. As you can imagine, this was mostly an anti-Microsoft crowd. Interestingly, several were already TeX or LaTeX users, and several criticized MS

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Hi Steve, I still find myself tweaking LyX formatting a bit at stages closer to finishing of the project writing, but it's just maybe I am not proficient enough with it yet. On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 20:37:56 +0100, Steve Litt sl...@troubleshooters.com wrote: Hi all, Last night, at Greater

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

There's two types of tweaking: With environments and character styles, which I wholeheartedly endorse, and with inline ERT, which I caution against except in the \frontmatter. SteveT On Thursday 02 April 2009 03:51:12 pm Yury Davidouski wrote: Hi Steve, I still find myself tweaking LyX

LyX vs. wordprocessors

Hi all, Last night, at Greater Orlando Linux User Group (GoLUG), I a gave a presentation on using TeX for simple tasks like printing shipping labels. As you can imagine, this was mostly an anti-Microsoft crowd. Interestingly, several were already TeX or LaTeX users, and several criticized MS

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

Hi Steve, I still find myself tweaking LyX formatting a bit at stages closer to finishing of the project writing, but it's just maybe I am not proficient enough with it yet. On Thu, 02 Apr 2009 20:37:56 +0100, Steve Litt wrote: Hi all, Last night, at

Re: LyX vs. wordprocessors

There's two types of tweaking: With environments and character styles, which I wholeheartedly endorse, and with inline ERT, which I caution against except in the \frontmatter. SteveT On Thursday 02 April 2009 03:51:12 pm Yury Davidouski wrote: > Hi Steve, > > I still find myself tweaking LyX