Are all LaTeX commands expressible as an X-expression? I need to think about this. If so, perhaps some facilities for converting x-expressions to LaTeX would be helpful.
I don't really like LaTeX, and only use it for PDF stuff in Pollen only because I've found nothing else that is a) scriptable, b) produces acceptable results, c) is likely to remain available and stable for at least a few years, and d) isn't expensive. In my ideal world, we could just use HTML as the output format for both the web and for print. As of April 2017 it's possible to use Chrome in headless mode to produce PDFs from HTML/CSS [1]. If Chrome were ever to support LaTeX's line-breaking and hyphenation algorithms, or if another such HTML-to-print engine surfaced, I probably would drop LaTeX pretty quickly, given that support for a lot of printed media formatting is already present in CSS [2]. [1]: https://developers.google.com/web/updates/2017/04/headless-chrome [2]: https://www.smashingmagazine.com/2015/01/designing-for-print-with-css/ On Thursday, October 5, 2017 at 1:24:41 PM UTC-5, Matthew Butterick wrote: > > I know that more than a few Pollen users (Pollenizers?) use it as a front > end to LaTeX. > > I don't use LaTeX in any deep way so I've not really considered the > Pollen–LaTeX interaction deeply. > > OTOH it seems like: > > 1) There is a small set of recurring problems that arise with LaTeX, that > could maybe have common solutions. > > 2) if Pollen had better LaTeX support, I'm sure it would bring more mildly > dissatisfied LaTeX users* across to Pollen > > [* in other words, all of them] > > > The question, which I can't really answer, is what form this should take. > From my dumb-person's understanding of LaTeX it would probably mean a set > of independent components: > > + a `pollen/latex` dialect that converts LaTeX into X-expressions? > > + a `pollen/template/latex` module that provides convenience functions for > converting X-expressions to LaTeX? > > + Obviously, Pollen/Racket would automatically add a lot of > programmability to LaTeX (no one seems to dispute that while LaTeX is > programmable, it should never actually be programmed). > > + As I show in the fourth tutorial, it's already possible to use the > project server to generate LaTeX PDF previews. [1] > > + Though I've been reluctant to put self-contained templates into Pollen, > I also recognize that a huge number of LaTeX users just rely on those six > default templates that it's had since 1979 or whatever. So it would make > sense to make it easy to use those templates in Pollen (though maybe that's > better put into a separate add-on library, so that my philosophical purity > is preserved.** > > [** No. The real reason I've avoided putting readymade templates in Pollen > is because I don't want to attract people who really want a turnkey system > like Squarespace or WordPress.] > > + What else? And is it worth doing? > > > [1] > http://docs.racket-lang.org/pollen/fourth-tutorial.html#%28part._.Adding_support_for_.P.D.F_output%29 > > <http://docs.racket-lang.org/pollen/fourth-tutorial.html#(part._.Adding_support_for_.P.D.F_output)> > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Pollen" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
