Hi Elliot,
There is nothing like a fool question.
As to ConTeXt and LuaTeX. When ConTeXt came out i thought that is
what I was waiting for, but when I went to the manuals I went UGHH!
How was this suppose to be easier than LaTeX. Since I did have the time
and nerve to learn, I let it drop, but that was just me and it has
evolved
Can not say any about Lua.
When xetex first can out I thought, oh goody I can use all my Mac fonts
and easier
input. Look at the documentation and became similarly disillusioned.
Several years later I am back on the band wagon and say things are
looking good
and are a lot easier to use.
Wether, you use Xe(La)TeX, Lua, or ConTeXt I would say it is a matter
of preference.
To get better information about Lua and ConTeXt go to a dedicated list.
regards
Keith.
Am 03.10.2010 um 21:23 schrieb Elliott Roper:
>
> On 2 Oct 2010, at 19:12, Philipp Stephani wrote:
>
>> Am 30.09.2010 um 20:12 schrieb Elliott Roper:
>>
>>> What I'm lacking is a set of beginner documents that ties all the TeX zoo
>>> together. Do I have to read source to find the definitive answer to which
>>> package has what package as a pre-requisite?
>>
>> Yes, and that won't change until LaTeX becomes a second ConTeXt.
> Hello again. I think I better postpone that discussion until I have
> experimented a lot more. I would be wasting your time and that of others on
> this list. I have been trying ConTeXt and LuaTeX as well as LaTeX and XeTeX
> with various packages and classes. Until I can clearly state what my problems
> with each of those are, there is not much point in asking more fool questions.
>>
>>> Which package breaks what others? Which order of \usepackages works and
>>> which doesn't? When do I use XeTeX? Which bits of LaTeX survive the
>>> transplant? Which don't? How do I use unicode-math? Why should I? When
>>> should I start again with LuaTeX?
>>
>> Nobody can give a definitive answer to all these questions. For the moment,
>> if pdflatex works for you, stick with it. For me, I can't reliably switch to
>> anything else until OTF math and microtypography work as expected.
>
> I suspect that is not an uncommon answer. I'll give up if I can't get OTF
> working well enough for what I want to do. I gave up on TeX twice before
> because of my arrogant view of its font shortcomings.
>>
>>> But I sure could use something that gives the beginner an overview. Maybe
>>> which topics in which documents for producing documents of type x. It is
>>> well covered for academic work already. Yet how do I do fine typesetting
>>> for books and magazine articles with lots of external illustrations, stored
>>> in paths and files with unicode and punctuation in their names? How do I
>>> impose signatures of small pages on large sheets, and which packages break
>>> when I try it?
>>
>> By not using LaTeX. Until there is a stable, modern foundation (LuaTeX plus
>> an appropriate kernel), I wouldn't recommend LaTeX for many things outside
>> the world of writing academic papers and theses. Mose people interested in
>> design and typography use InDesign or QuarkXPress, and ConTeXt might be an
>> option, too.
>
> I have already given up on InDesign. It is OK for less than 20 pages when you
> care more about the look than you do about the content. The idea of sending
> $1000 to Adobe every two years to get bug fixes and a bunch of features I
> don't want gets old pretty quickly.
>
> Elliott Roper
>
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
> http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
--------------------------------------------------
Subscriptions, Archive, and List information, etc.:
http://tug.org/mailman/listinfo/xetex
