On 2009-04-06, Typhoon wrote: > On Mon, 6 Apr 2009 06:38:35 +0000 (UTC) > Guenter Milde <[email protected]> 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 not work for math, references, citations and hence is not >> advisable for scientific papers. > 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. I agree that reStructuredText is a good way for semantic markup and a candidate for a "least common denominator" for document format conversion. However, it is not plain text (which the OP suggested) so that you still need a) to convince all your co-authors to use this format, or b) good converters from other formats to rst. Günter
