On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 14:18 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote: > Thomas Anderson wrote: > > As Fabian said it really isn't a matter of "We like XML better than LaTeX!" > > It's not those people's prerogative. > > Problems like having homogeneous documentation aren't that small. > > > The people who wrote PMS should be able to make the decision > > for themselves(as they will be maintaining it) as to what language to > > use. > > The main point being using latex prevents people from modify it. >
Untrue... latex is documented, and lots of people feel more comfortable with it than with XML (for example me). It's just a matter of taste and thus a decision of the people actually doing the work. > > If they use LaTeX, more power to them, it's what enables them to do > > their job in the easiest way. > > Depends on what the job is. > > > You don't *have* to read PMS in LaTeX, > > which by the way makes my eyes bleed somewhat, you can read it in a very > > well done PDF. > > The pdf renders poorly on xpdf due the fonts latex has, usually I'd > rather have plain text anyway. > Install app-text/evince. It looks quite nice there.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
