Is conversion to LaTeX a requirement or merely a nice-to-have?

On Jul 25, 1:16 pm, "Timothy Clemans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> That is already available by creating Wiki-books. Wiki-books can not
> be easily converted to LaTeX documents.http://en.wikibooks.org
>
> On 7/25/07, Chris Chiasson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Someone has to be evil and mention this:
> > MediaWiki
>
> > If you are willing to sacrifice absolute editorial control, the wiki
> > documentation can develop organically at its own pace and in the
> > manner that the writers choose.
>
> > There is already a site that wove together Mathematica and MediaWiki.
> > The same could probably be done for SAGE. Of course, that site hasn't
> > done so well because the Mathematica user base is so small and the pre-
> > existing documentation for Mathematica nullifies much pf the possible
> > benefit of the wiki. Not to mention that MMA 6 broke the site...
>
> > Doesn't MediaWiki already support some TeX/LaTeX?
>
> > On Jul 22, 8:41 pm, "William Stein" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hello,
>
> > > I think SAGE might potentially greatly benefit from certain types of new
> > > documentation.   Unfortunately, after consider a number of possibilities,
> > > I'm unsure about how to proceed. I'll discuss the best idea Josh Kantor
> > > and I came up with below.  Let me know what you think, or suggest
> > > something else if you have any other ideas, or let me know what your
> > > concerns are (or if you would like to volunteer some writing).
>
> > > We could create a new manual, similar in format to the "SAGE
> > > Tutorial", "SAGE Reference
> > > manual", etc., but instead entitled "SAGE Overview".  This latex document 
> > > might
> > > have chapters entitled as follows, and primary contributors as listed
> > > to the right:
> > >    * Calculus -- me, Bobby Moretti, ??
> > >    * Combinatorics -- Robert Miller, Emily Kirkman
> > >    * Algebra -- Martin Albrecht, David Joyner
> > >    * Number Theory -- William Stein, Jaap Spies, David Kohel
> > >    * Linear Algebra -- Josh Kantor, Robert Bradshaw, William Stein
> > >    * Numerical Computation -- Josh Kantor
> > >    * Plotting -- Tom Boothby, Josh Kantor, Me, Alex Clemesha
>
> > > Each chapter would have a few paragraphs that overview what one can do
> > > in SAGE related to each topic, followed by sections that go into more 
> > > detail
> > > with examples.   This is probably a very rough prototype of the sort of
> > > information the numerical computation chapter might provide:
> > >    http://www.math.washington.edu/~jkantor/C_Fortran/C_Fortran.html
>
> > > The idea is that if you're a new users to SAGE, after getting
> > > some very basic feeling for SAGE, you flip directly to the relevant
> > > chapter of the book *for you*, e.g., if you do algebra you read that
> > > chapter, if you do calculus you read the calculus chapter, etc.
> > > And in reading that chapter, you get a pretty good sense of
> > > what SAGE is capable in your specialty, where to find further
> > > documentation (e.g., when you read about number theory,
> > > you learn that SAGE includes NTL, that NTL can do blah,
> > > and that you can find out more at location xyz).  Also, there
> > > are some (but not too many) doctested examples throughout.
>
> > > What do people think?  People would contribute to this document
> > > using hg_doc patches, just like they do now with tutorial, etc., 
> > > contributions.
>
> > > An alternative would be to create short books for each topical
> > > area.  This might be more manageable, or it might be less
> > > manageable; I'm not sure.
>
> > > --
> > > William Stein
> > > Associate Professor of Mathematics
> > > University of Washingtonhttp://www.williamstein.org


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to