Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 23:34:58 +0200 From: michaelgrunewald@yahoo.fr To: jahnke@sonatabio.com Cc: michaelgrunewald@yahoo.fr, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Equations Message-ID: <86k5q1gs8t.fsf@Llea.celt.neu> In-Reply-To: <1191604254.2944.12.camel@pinot.fmjassoc.com> (Frank Jahnke's message of "Fri\, 05 Oct 2007 10\:10\:54 -0700") References: <1191604254.2944.12.camel@pinot.fmjassoc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Frank Jahnke <jahnke@sonatabio.com> writes:
>> Since you seem to use the equation feature quite intensively, maybe
>> you have any clue on making the equation editor perform better.
>
> Sorry I can't really be of much help with OO.o equations.=20=20
>
> What I do personally is a kludge, but it works well enough. For
> ...
Thank you for your nice answer. It seems there is no reason to be
optimistic about the existence of an ``office-like'' program
that deals smartly with equations. I am always a bit surprised that
TeX was released in 78 (before my birth!) and---despite its algorithms
are published---its output quality remains unmatched [1] by common
programs. Why these programs do not apply TeX's strategies to solve
their problems? This makes me wonder.
[1] Lyx was mentioned elsethread, on the project's website I found
a text example processed by TeX and Word. The text is four pages
long, the columns ist not especially narrow. To prepare this text,
Word needs 8 word hyphenations in the first page, with three of
them in a row (which is very bad). In the TeX processed version,
theres is only two word hyphenations in the whole document.
WWW: http://wiki.lyx.org/Examples/ComparingLyXAndWord
This is not a definite proof that TeX's output quality remains
unmatched, but just an example.
--=20
Cheers,
Micha=EBl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?86k5q1gs8t.fsf>