On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Thomas S. Dye <t...@tsdye.com> wrote: > John Hendy <jw.he...@gmail.com> writes: > >> I'm thinking that the article class must either 1) >> not embody "the classic rules" that well or 2) the classic rules >> aren't very aesthetically pleasing after all. > > or 3) the classic rules are variable and flexible.
I love out-of-the-box thinking :) > > Here is a quote from the Koma script manual: > > Many LATEX classes, including the standard classes, present the user > with the largely fixed configuration of margins and typearea. With the > standard classes, the configuration determined is very much dependent > on the chosen font size. There are separate packages, such as geometry > (see [Ume00]), which give the user complete control, but also full > responsibility, of the settings of typearea and margins. > > KOMA-Script takes a somewhat different approach with its typearea > package. Here the user is given several construction setting and > automatization possibilities based on established typography standards > in order to help guide him or her in making a good choice. > Interesting quote! You've sold me on Michael's original suggestion and I'll be checking out Koma more closely very soon. It's great timing as a semi-annual technical report at work is due from me shortly :) John > All the best, > Tom > > -- > Thomas S. Dye > http://www.tsdye.com
