<div>Sorry for the late entry.</div><div><br></div><div>At one point I really loved TeX. Well, LaTeX to be certain -- I wrote my own macros and found it a very nice way to create pretty print versions of database reports, etc. The DVI creation process was certainly familiar to those who were used to compiling code. I was a card--carrying member of TUG. But I always REALLY detested Computer Modern as a font from a graphic design PoV and I could never wrap my head around Metafont.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Having said that, for better or worse, we're in a world in which HTML5 will soon predominate, and with the exception of math formatting IMO TeX has outlived its usefulness. (And whether I'd call TeX books "beautiful" is an eye-of-the-beholder thing IMO.) TeX had such a steep learning curve that it was hard to learn other publishing tools in parallel, leading to "if all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail" syndrome. And, of course, it didn't help that only a handful of publishing houses would accept TeX formatted manuscripts.</div>
<div><br></div><div>As I make a personal transition into ePub for book work and away from the printed word, I start to think of TeX as I do Fortran ... functional in their day and absolutely necessary in the evolution of the craft, but there are now better and easier ways to get there from here. TeX/Metafont preceded Unicode and OpenType and Dublin Core and MathML and ePub and CSS, all standards which have received widespread support from both toolmakers and content producers and arguably serve their needs better. </div>
<div><br></div><div>By contrast, the DVI paradigm has had little room to evolve. It's ill-suited to environments designed to give users real-time control (ie, real-time font resizing). The concept of user control (even to the point of choosing a different font should they choose) is a horror to TeX document producers (as well as to most InDesign, Scribus and even MS-Word users). But it's a coming phenomenon that publishers ignore at their risk. In the kind of text-heavy environment which describes most TeX-produced books I've seen, the publisher's need for exact control over style is even less compelling than in graphic-intensive settings (unless you're doing poetry, which doesn't seem like one of TeX's strengths anyway). The value of the very same document file being usable on a PC, tablet or 4" mobile screen while maintaining readability is something Knuth didn't consider, but it's critical now for a growing number of documents. These days reflowable text is far more in demand than the world's most meticulous hyphenation algorithm.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Yes, TeX is a great typesetting system. But the world doesn't need typesetting the way it used to, and at its heart TeX is hostile to the Internet generally and user-controlled formatting specifically. If TeX was a niche in the best of times -- barely known outside of the realms of math and physics academia -- what does that make its status now? Probably on the same plane as direct-to-disc audio recording -- the best technology in a rapidly declining field.</div>
<div><br></div><div>- Evan</div><div><br></div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 27 April 2011 22:21, Peter King <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:peter.king-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA@public.gmane.org">peter.king-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA@public.gmane.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><div class="im">On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 09:19:46PM -0400, William Park wrote:<br>
<br>
> By the way, what tools do professionals use nowdays? TeX is the only<br>
> tool I know, but I doubt if people use that.<br>
<br>
</div>TeX, and in fact, plain TeX. I produce critical editions of texts with it.<br>
So do many scholars. I have seen editions in English, Latin, Greek, Arabic,<br>
and Hebrew, all set with TeX.<br>
<br>
Math journals are well-nigh universally set in some version of TeX (usually<br>
with AMSTeX). Cambridge University Press typesets its "Companion" series<br>
of volumes using LaTeX. And so on.<br>
<br>
If you want high-quality typesetting and beautiful books, TeX is still a<br>
major player. The things it does well (most things), it does extremely well,<br>
a testament to Donald Knuth. It does show its age in spots, and there are<br>
several competitors for "successor" status: XeTeX, for instance. But plain<br>
TeX can still be set up to do just about anything, since it is not so much<br>
a typesetting program as it is a typesetting programming language. People<br>
can do simply *amazing* things with it.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Peter King <a href="mailto:peter.king@utoronto.ca">peter.king-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA@public.gmane.org</a><br>
Department of Philosophy<br>
170 St. George Street #521<br>
The University of Toronto (416)-978-4951 ofc<br>
Toronto, ON M5R 2M8<br>
CANADA<br>
<br>
<a href="http://individual.utoronto.ca/pking/" target="_blank">http://individual.utoronto.ca/pking/</a><br>
<br>
=========================================================================<br>
GPG keyID 0x7587EC42 (2B14 A355 46BC 2A16 D0BC 36F5 1FE6 D32A 7587 EC42)<br>
gpg --keyserver <a href="http://pgp.mit.edu" target="_blank">pgp.mit.edu</a> --recv-keys 7587EC42<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div style="text-align:center">Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada<br>Em: evan at telly dot org<br>Sk: evanleibovitch<br>Tw: el56</div><br>