On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 +0000 (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 on a final version. It may > > not look pretty, but it's efficient. > > This does not work for math, references, citations and hence is not > advisable for scientific papers. > > Also, the section structure might be more sensible to have early in > the process. The math point may be valid, but there is nothing to prevent the other items from being done in a plain text format with some minimal markup language. ReST (restructured text) has quite a rich set of markups that are easy to include. ReST certainly encourages a section structure. 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. Alan > > (Besides this, extracting the plain text (e.g. from a PDF) and (re) > format is always possible as a fallback solution.) > > Günter > >
