Re: [NTG-context] ruby
Hans Hagen wrote: Hi, when pondering about some ruby to bin for unix and googling a bit, A little off-topic: why ruby and not python ? i ran into: http://www.erikveen.dds.nl/ruby.html amazing stuff, not only rubyscript2exe (cross platform)! bookmarked luigi ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] ruby
luigi.scarso wrote: A little off-topic: why ruby and not python ? - i didn't like those tabs/indentation - ruby's reminded me of modula which i used a (real) lot in the past - ruby has a small footprint - i just like it Hans - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl - ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
[NTG-context] Fill pdf forms
Looking for some stuff do manage pdf forms,I found this http://search.cpan.org/~clotho/CAM-PDF-0.99/ From http://search.cpan.org/src/CLOTHO/CAM-PDF-0.99/index.html CAM::PDF is optimized for reading and manipulating existing PDF documents. We use CAM::PDF in production Linux environments to customize template PDF documents that were often created by non-programmers using standard tools. In standard distro there are already fdf2tan.pl and fdf2tex.pl, and after reading spec-fdf I don't understand if they work ( running fdf2tan.pl gives ! Undefined control sequence. recently read \annotatepages ). luigi ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
[NTG-context] Is there a mathematica typesetting manual for ConTeXt ?
hi all, I am a newbie of ConTeXt, i'm sorry if my question is foolish. I have two questions: 1. Is there a mathematica typesetting manual for ConTeXt ? There seems no ConTeXt manual focused on mathematica. Or I just need to find a mathematica manual for LaTeX ? 2. I'm running TeTeX 2.0.2 on Debian Sarge, and the version of texexec is 3.1 which I think is out of date, so i tried to update ConTeXt. I downloaded www.pragma-ade.com/context/latest/cont-tmf.zip , and unziped it to /usr/local/share/texmf/, then I ran mktexlsr and texexec --make --all. But when i ran texexec --version, the version was still 3.1. It seemed that the texexec wasn't updated. Thanks in advance!! ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
[NTG-context] font mapfiles
I just had to reinstall my TeX installation (upgrade to OS X 10.4). After mucking around with my old TeX, I decided to reinstall, and I hit a problem: even though I ran updmap, ConTeXt doesn't seem to work with the fonts I installed myself unless I include the \loadmapfile [foo] either in the typescript or in the source file. This wasn't the case before. I also tried moving the mapfiles to texmf/fonts/map/ pdftex/context insteadt of just fonts/map/, but that didn't change anything. Am I missing something obvious, or is this the expected behavior? I much prefer to have system-wide mapfiles since I use LaTeX from time to time and want the same fonts available there. They work with plain pdfetex as well, it's just ConTeXt that gives trouble. So my question is: is this the new setup, are we supposed to load mapfiles this way, and what is the advantage over the old method? Thanks! Thomas ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Is there a mathematica typesetting manual for ConTeXt ?
redox wrote: hi all, I am a newbie of ConTeXt, i'm sorry if my question is foolish. I have two questions: 1. Is there a mathematica typesetting manual for ConTeXt ? There seems no ConTeXt manual focused on mathematica. Or I just need to find a mathematica manual for LaTeX ? 2. I'm running TeTeX 2.0.2 on Debian Sarge, and the version of texexec is 3.1 which I think is out of date, so i tried to update ConTeXt. I downloaded www.pragma-ade.com/context/latest/cont-tmf.zip , and unziped it to /usr/local/share/texmf/, then I ran mktexlsr and texexec --make --all. But when i ran texexec --version, the version was still 3.1. It seemed that the texexec wasn't updated. try to locate texexec.pl (somewhere in the scripts path) and move that to the bino path (remove suffix) Hans - Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com | www.pragma-pod.nl - ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Context, LaTeX, or an XML for academic writing?
Actually your comment here might suggest how far we have to go then, as I'd consider my wishlist a very roughly stated but really quite minimal set of requirements for academic writing. Well, if you drop the RTF part, then your wishlist is not that difficult. However, there are some requirements which look trivial at first but are rather difficult to make well. The most important of these is the difference between HTML and a printed book. As long as you use only running text (no illustrations, graphs, images, formulae, tables), there is no problem. By making suitable templates the text may be typeset well and it works as a web page (or a collection of web pages). In HTML you have less control over the layout, but as the user has the control, everything is well. Some problems arise when you add any special elements to the text. Formulae are a good example. Even though you might in principle use MathML or equivalent, the browser support is not built-in, so most users cannot read the formulae. You'll need to use images, but then the best resolution is hard to find. The same goes with images, SVG is not ready yet, so resolution problems are really difficult. Illustrations which print well at high resolution do not necessarily look good at screen resolution. But the real problems start with floats. Where do you put a picture with its captions on a web page? Or a footnote? One common solution is to put them behind a link. However, some people (yours truly included) find that following the links back and forth is clumsy. Another solution would be to place the figures within the text, but then we have all sorts of typesetting problems without having a typesetting engine. Of course, you can make miracles with XHTML/CSS. You can make something that looks laike pages from a book, for example. But then, why not really use PDF instead? Because then you can be sure of the layout. The hyperlink navigation paradigm of HTML is a good one for many purposes. It is not a good one for a book. If I have a book (or a PDF), I can easily verify I've read it to the last comma. With a more complicated (even a simple tree without loops) HTML document trying the same reminds me of the Maze all different in the old Adventure game (Colossal Cave Adventure by Will Growther). I am not saying HTML is bad and PDF good. HTML is extremely good for many purposes. Wiki is a good example of this, and so are many web pages. But as HTML is not necessarily a good form for a book, concentrating on PDF is probably a better idea. --- Since posting I've thought a bit more about why I wanted RTF, and realised it wouldn't do what I wanted anyway. The 'inter-operation with Word users' I was referring to is primarily this: it's common amongst academics I know here in Australia to use some of the collaboration features of Word (marginal comments and revision control, particularly). RTF wouldn't actually help with those anyway. So there's really no way around this without using Word, which I will only do at gunpoint. Well, if everyone around you is using Word and requires you to collaborate by using Word, you are up to your lower back in alligators. On the other hand, there are ways around this. What I use when commenting on other people's texts, I want to have the texts as PDF. Then I just simply write a mail with my comments: p. 123, paragraph 2: Not so. Dr. Frankenstein proved this to be wrong in 1974, see Journal of Unlikely Science, 1865, pp. 1456-1505 p.127, figure 2.13: I don't get it. Exactly same thing as scribbling things into the margin. This method is independent of the programs used and does not really take any more time. I have found only two shortcomings with this method: 1. it is difficult to combine comments from several reviewers, 2. you cannot edit the text yourself even if you wanted to. The first one is a problem with Word documents, as well, and the second one is not always so desirable, anyway. Really, I hate it when people send me their Word files. I am quite convinced I am not the only one. The annotation mechanism in Word is similar to almost everything else in the program: looks easy, feels easy at first, makes you run circles on the walls in the end. - Ville ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] presentation style
Hi Fei, If possible, prepare a minimal file or set of generally compilable files (i.e., with just the latest official context distribution) that illustrates the problem. If it's too big for the mailing list, feel free to send it to me and I'll try (but do not promise success-). Best Idris On Wed, 11 May 2005 23:37:11 -0700, Fei He [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi there, I used Skdk_style for a presentation, the style file downloaded from the contextgarden.net. It was all fine with the TexExec 5.2.3. I just updated TexExec to 5.2.4 version. However, the active link on the right side stopped working, i.e. after clicking on the title, it wont go to the title page which it was linked to. Also the page number now is explicitly shown on the slides too, as you will see the numbers in black. Attached is just one page from the presentation. Any suggestions how to have it fixed? Thanks a bunch!! -- Professor Idris Samawi Hamid Department of Philosophy Colorado State University Fort Collins, CO 80523 ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Is there a mathematica typesetting manual for ConTeXt ?
On 5/12/05, redox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi all, I am a newbie of ConTeXt, i'm sorry if my question is foolish. I have two questions: 1. Is there a mathematica typesetting manual for ConTeXt ? There seems no ConTeXt manual focused on mathematica. Or I just need to find a mathematica manual for LaTeX ? What do you mean by mathematica typesetting? I am sometimes using the Mathematica math fonts. I also wrote somekind of macro that try to immitate Mathematica notebooks, a shot is given at http://www.math.chalmers.se/~mickep/mma.png The files for the fonts (the fonts are freely available) can I share without problems, but the macros for the book I can not share (yet at least). If this did not help in any way, please ask again. /Micke P 2. I'm running TeTeX 2.0.2 on Debian Sarge, and the version of texexec is 3.1 which I think is out of date, so i tried to update ConTeXt. I downloaded www.pragma-ade.com/context/latest/cont-tmf.zip , and unziped it to /usr/local/share/texmf/, then I ran mktexlsr and texexec --make --all. But when i ran texexec --version, the version was still 3.1. It seemed that the texexec wasn't updated. Thanks in advance!! ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
[NTG-context] Re: try compiling Tex showcase source : program_sample.tex
Christopher Creutzig wrote: olivier Turlier wrote: I've tryed to compile whithout success. The files are deliberately incomplete. ...generate the output, is more than a simple texexec. :-) Regards, Christopher Hi Christopher, I was trying to compile Program-sample.tex because I find the transparent white frame over the grey background very nice to see for a pure electronic pdf. In the same range, the vit Zyka font demo catalog (http://typokvitek.com/stormcontext/) push hard the limit of those transparent overlays that I'm still in quest to reproduce. Salutations -- Olivier TURLIER ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Re: try compiling Tex showcase source : program_sample.tex
olivier Turlier wrote:
Christopher Creutzig wrote:
olivier Turlier wrote:
I've tryed to compile whithout success.
The files are deliberately incomplete. ...generate the output, is
more than a simple texexec. :-)
Regards,
Christopher
Hi Christopher,
I was trying to compile Program-sample.tex because I find the
transparent white frame over the grey background very nice to see for a
pure electronic pdf. In the same range, the vit Zyka font demo catalog
interesting document (maybe there should be a copy on the wiki)
(http://typokvitek.com/stormcontext/) push hard the limit of those
transparent overlays that I'm still in quest to reproduce.
not sure what you mean here ... the demo shows up ok here; (maybe it will look
slightly better if the big two-chars are behind the text) ; the main thing to
keep into mind with transparencies is that some versions of the reader mess up
anti aliasing when transparencies are involved;
i took a quick look in the style -)
\expandafter\processcommalist\expandafter[\glyphset]\doglyph
== processcommacommand[\glyphset]\doglyph
\expandafter\switchtobodyfont\expandafter[\the\bigInitSize]#1}%
== \expanded{\switchtobodyfont[\the\bigInitSize]}
actually i think that the expanded is not even needed here
(best to use UpperCaseNames in order to prevent clashes)
Hans
-
Hans Hagen | PRAGMA ADE
Ridderstraat 27 | 8061 GH Hasselt | The Netherlands
tel: 038 477 53 69 | fax: 038 477 53 74 | www.pragma-ade.com
| www.pragma-pod.nl
-
___
ntg-context mailing list
ntg-context@ntg.nl
http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Context, LaTeX, or an XML for academic writing?
Ville Voipio wrote: I am not saying HTML is bad and PDF good. HTML is extremely good for many purposes. Wiki is a good example of this, and so are many web pages. But as HTML is not necessarily a good form for a book, concentrating on PDF is probably a better idea. I hadn't thought of half the stuff you mention, which comes of the fact that my requirements come anticipation rather than recent use (I'm returning to academia after 10 years being in jobs where the only writing I've had to do is reports in Word for semi-literate business people). I thought it might be good to pick and learn a system now rather than start with one format only to find deficiencies and have to switch later. I can see a place for books and articles in HTML, but as a supplement to PDF for fast online browsing (and in that context I don't see a problem with just reducing layout standards). But I agree PDF is the thing to concentrate on for fully-formatted output. Well, if everyone around you is using Word and requires you to collaborate by using Word, you are up to your lower back in alligators. On the other hand, there are ways around this. What I use when commenting on other people's texts, I want to have the texts as PDF. Then I just simply write a mail with my comments: p. 123, paragraph 2: Not so. Dr. Frankenstein proved this to be wrong in 1974, see Journal of Unlikely Science, 1865, pp. 1456-1505 p.127, figure 2.13: I don't get it. That seems fine to me, but many people are often so wowed by GUI stuff that they wouldn't consider using this rather than the pretty marginal notes that Word produces. I have a friend in academia here who does successfully resist the (sometimes quite heavy) insistence on Word. She just says that she's not willing to be forced to use the products of a foreign monopolist which has been found guilty of large-scale corporate malfeasance in multiple jurisdictions worldwide. Being a humanities-based academic, she can get away with this ;) Her colleagues yawn and tell her to use what she wants. Really, I hate it when people send me their Word files. I am quite convinced I am not the only one. The annotation mechanism in Word is similar to almost everything else in the program: looks easy, feels easy at first, makes you run circles on the walls in the end. - Ville That's also my experience. I've worked in a company which has hired very expensive Microsoft consultants to come in and set up some Sharepoint+Word-based workflow for documentation. The system was so complex and fragile, it got dumped within weeks and everyone went back to hacking up adhoc Word docs again, copying and pasting like fury. ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
Re: [NTG-context] Is there a mathematica typesetting manual for ConTeXt ?
Hi, Mikael, Thanks for your kindness, and sorry for my bad English ^_^ I mean I want to type some math formulas with ConTeXt. Since i don't know too much about ConTeXt/TeX, i want to find a manual about this subject and to learn by myself. In the ConTeXt an excursion(page 15), it says, We advise you to do some further reading on typesetting formula in TeX. See for example: The TeXBook by D.E. Kunth The Beginners Book of TeX by S. Levy and R.Seroul I know that LaTeX(and AMS-LaTeX) has made some extensions to TeX in math typesetting, so I'm wondering if ConTeXt has also made extensions to TeX, or I can only type math formula in the way of basic TeX ? xiaojf Mikael Persson wrote: On 5/12/05, redox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hi all, I am a newbie of ConTeXt, i'm sorry if my question is foolish. I have two questions: 1. Is there a mathematica typesetting manual for ConTeXt ? There seems no ConTeXt manual focused on mathematica. Or I just need to find a mathematica manual for LaTeX ? What do you mean by mathematica typesetting? I am sometimes using the Mathematica math fonts. I also wrote somekind of macro that try to immitate Mathematica notebooks, a shot is given at http://www.math.chalmers.se/~mickep/mma.png The files for the fonts (the fonts are freely available) can I share without problems, but the macros for the book I can not share (yet at least). If this did not help in any way, please ask again. /Micke P 2. I'm running TeTeX 2.0.2 on Debian Sarge, and the version of texexec is 3.1 which I think is out of date, so i tried to update ConTeXt. I downloaded www.pragma-ade.com/context/latest/cont-tmf.zip , and unziped it to /usr/local/share/texmf/, then I ran mktexlsr and texexec --make --all. But when i ran texexec --version, the version was still 3.1. It seemed that the texexec wasn't updated. Thanks in advance!! ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context ___ ntg-context mailing list ntg-context@ntg.nl http://www.ntg.nl/mailman/listinfo/ntg-context
