Hmmm... On the other hand, if you are not brave enough to switch from document preparation system called LaTeX to other document preparation system called ConTeXt, there are still alternatives:
Document classes of "KOMA-script" and a document class called "memoir" offer very much configurability without need of adding umpteen gazillion packages to preamble of LaTeX-file. In most cases you can avoid creating new document classes, if you use aforementioned document classes. But in ConTeXt, there is even more configurability without need to add more packages/modules, of course.
Especially memoir is good for avoiding many packages and potential of their compability problems. Author of that document class created many packages in order to accomplish many things that document classes did not provide. Then he created a document class called memoir, that has practically all functionality of those packages built-in in that document class itself. For example typesetting poetry in LaTeX without packages is not very flexible. Author of memoir created a package called "verse" for that purpose but its functionality is also included in memoir, of course.
P.S: It seems Unicode support of Slashdot sucks bigtime. In my former comment I tried to say "don't" using real single quotation mark provided by Unicode (U+2019 RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK), but Slashdot mangled it to "donÃ(TM)t".
I suggest ConTeXt. It is a little bit like LaTeX, but it is more modern. It has no compability problems of LaTeX-packages, because everything that you need comes with it. But it also has counterpart of LaTeX-packages; they are called ConTeXt-modules, IIRC.
ConTeXt can use many TeX-engines: It uses pdfTeX by default and it may be possible to use original TeX or e-TeX. But right now the best TeX-engine is XeTeX, IMHO. As long as your operating system can use some font, XeTeX can use it, too. XeTeX supports OpenType- and TrueType-fonts and Unicode very well.
pdfTeX accepts PDF, JPG and PNG as format of embedded pictures. I donâ(TM)t know, what kind of pictures can be used with XeTeX.
But keep your eye on LuaTeX: One day it may be the best TeX-engine ever, but right now it is under development.
For editing ConTeXt-markup the best option is GNU Emacs with elisp-package called AUCTeX. Also Vim is good for editing ConTeXt.
"If you blow Computer Modern up to 150% or so, which in my experience tends to be what happens if you fit the width of a document to a good-sized monitor, I think it looks pretty good. But at 10 or 12pt at 100% magnification on a low-resolution device like a computer monitor, you lose all the fine detail that you need."
That is where the problem really is: Everybody haven't got enough money to buy big monitor with good resolution.
"My first point was that TeX is not directly suitable for describing mathematical formulas on the web, and it's not. I don't know of any browsers that support TeX."
Of course, there are better fonts for screen, for example Bitstream Charter and its enhanced version called Charis SIL and Bitstream Vera -fontfamily and its enhanced version called DejaVu Fonts. But even Times and its clones are much better for screen than fonts of Computer Modern family. Computer Modern is so light that reading it from screen is like raping my eyes, especially when using low-resolution screen. *PUKE* |-O~
Read some other replies in this discussion. Maybe then you will understand, why LaTeX itself and its default fonts (Computer Modern) are not enough for all. I don't bother repeat all that stuff.
BS! Are you troll or otherwise stupid? It is possible to convert TeX-based docs to HTML. For example tex4ht can convert LaTeX to HTML. If there are some mathematical formulas, they can be converted to MathML. It is also common to convert LaTeX to HTML so that all math is converted to pictures.
BTW there is a whole book about using LaTeX on the Web. That really makes your statement "Have fun using TeX on the web. Oh wait, you can't." extremely ridiculous. That book is "The LaTeX Web Companion: Integrating TeX, HTML, and XML" by Michel Goossens, Sebastian Rahtz, Eitan M. Gurari, Ross Moore, and Robert S. Sutor.
According to people in debian-legal -mailinglist that latest license is not yet free enough. Also, IIRC those fonts can not be included to TeX Live, because license is not yet free enough. Problem is this: Not every kind of modification is allowed. You can remove or add glyphs and modify them, but there are also other things that can be done to fonts, for example modifying kerning.
But nowadays it does not work like that in practice. Many of those LaTeX-packages have some fonts that do not sit well with some other fonts that may be in same LaTeX-document. One reason for creating STIX Fonts is to rectif that situation.
On the other hand, those default fonts of TeX (Computer Modern) are not very suitable for reading from screen. STIX Fonts have Times-like appearance.
Have you ever tried to read those default fonts of TeX (Computer Modern) from the screen? Trust me: It is just raping your eyes. But of course, they want to make those STIX Fonts fonts free (as in free speech). Those fonts of Mathematica are not free in that sense.
It is Unicode-font. Therefore your problem _may_ exist only with those characters that are mapped to Private Use Area. It seems those fonts have some characters that are not yet in Unicode.
STIX Fonts have both text fonts and math fonts. Therefore you do not need to care, how they look like with other serif fonts used for body, because STIX Fonts can handle that body text, too. On the other hand, STIX Fonts are made to look like Times. Therefore, any sans serif and monospace font that looks good with Times should look good with STIX Fonts.
Read that fscking website, you idiot! Those fonts are primarily meant for TeX-based applications, for example LaTeX. Yes, LaTeX has umpteen gazillion packages for writing all those exotic mathematical operators, but STIX Fonts provides them totally consistent outlook.
Stupid. Those fonts are primarily meant for TeX-based applications, for example LaTeX. rarely used characters are written with commands that start with backslash, for example: \ldots .
Here in Finland Hyundai sells are car model called Sonata. AFAIK it is sold under model name Sonta in the rest of the world. In Finnish language "sonta" means "muck" or "dung".
Hey it would be nice, if buggy software like sendmail and tcsh were burned on a stake!:-P And that leaked copy of Windows sourcecode could be burned like that, too.
There exist many musicians, that think about music in more or less same way as Free Software Foundation thinks about software: It must be free as a bird. Some of them are against a notion of "copyright" and "intellectual property".
So, get some free music. It will fill at least few gigabytes. Some of that music has such licence, that forbids selling that music, but for your purpose even that kind of music is good.
Here are my URLs:
http://www.ram.org/ramblings/philosophy/fmp/fma. ht ml http://www.ram.org/ramblings/philosophy/fmp.ht ml http://www.ram.org/ramblings/philosophy/fmp/co pyin g_primer.html http://www.twisted-helices.com/th/t wisted_helices. html
Slashdot Mirror
I really hope Tesla and other electric car makers will use those batteries.
It seems none of you have given reference sites about programming with shells, like Bourne Shell and its derivatives, like bash, ksh and zsh.
Hmmm... On the other hand, if you are not brave enough to switch from document preparation system called LaTeX to other document preparation system called ConTeXt, there are still alternatives:
Document classes of "KOMA-script" and a document class called "memoir" offer very much configurability without need of adding umpteen gazillion packages to preamble of LaTeX-file. In most cases you can avoid creating new document classes, if you use aforementioned document classes. But in ConTeXt, there is even more configurability without need to add more packages/modules, of course.
Especially memoir is good for avoiding many packages and potential of their compability problems. Author of that document class created many packages in order to accomplish many things that document classes did not provide. Then he created a document class called memoir, that has practically all functionality of those packages built-in in that document class itself. For example typesetting poetry in LaTeX without packages is not very flexible. Author of memoir created a package called "verse" for that purpose but its functionality is also included in memoir, of course.
P.S: It seems Unicode support of Slashdot sucks bigtime. In my former comment I tried to say "don't" using real single quotation mark provided by Unicode (U+2019 RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK), but Slashdot mangled it to "donÃ(TM)t".
I suggest ConTeXt. It is a little bit like LaTeX, but it is more modern. It has no compability problems of LaTeX-packages, because everything that you need comes with it. But it also has counterpart of LaTeX-packages; they are called ConTeXt-modules, IIRC.
ConTeXt can use many TeX-engines: It uses pdfTeX by default and it may be possible to use original TeX or e-TeX. But right now the best TeX-engine is XeTeX, IMHO. As long as your operating system can use some font, XeTeX can use it, too. XeTeX supports OpenType- and TrueType-fonts and Unicode very well.
pdfTeX accepts PDF, JPG and PNG as format of embedded pictures. I donâ(TM)t know, what kind of pictures can be used with XeTeX.
But keep your eye on LuaTeX: One day it may be the best TeX-engine ever, but right now it is under development.
For editing ConTeXt-markup the best option is GNU Emacs with elisp-package called AUCTeX. Also Vim is good for editing ConTeXt.
"If you blow Computer Modern up to 150% or so, which in my experience tends to be what happens if you fit the width of a document to a good-sized monitor, I think it looks pretty good. But at 10 or 12pt at 100% magnification on a low-resolution device like a computer monitor, you lose all the fine detail that you need."
That is where the problem really is: Everybody haven't got enough money to buy big monitor with good resolution.
"My first point was that TeX is not directly suitable for describing mathematical formulas on the web, and it's not. I don't know of any browsers that support TeX."
http://www.integretechpub.com/techexplorer/
Of course, there are better fonts for screen, for example Bitstream Charter and its enhanced version called Charis SIL and Bitstream Vera -fontfamily and its enhanced version called DejaVu Fonts. But even Times and its clones are much better for screen than fonts of Computer Modern family. Computer Modern is so light that reading it from screen is like raping my eyes, especially when using low-resolution screen. *PUKE* |-O~
That is weird. Opinion of FSF about STIX Fonts License is not yet in thei license list pages:
http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses
http://www.gnu.org/licenses/
Read some other replies in this discussion. Maybe then you will understand, why LaTeX itself and its default fonts (Computer Modern) are not enough for all. I don't bother repeat all that stuff.
BS! Are you troll or otherwise stupid? It is possible to convert TeX-based docs to HTML. For example tex4ht can convert LaTeX to HTML. If there are some mathematical formulas, they can be converted to MathML. It is also common to convert LaTeX to HTML so that all math is converted to pictures.
BTW there is a whole book about using LaTeX on the Web. That really makes your statement "Have fun using TeX on the web. Oh wait, you can't." extremely ridiculous. That book is "The LaTeX Web Companion: Integrating TeX, HTML, and XML" by Michel Goossens, Sebastian Rahtz, Eitan M. Gurari, Ross Moore, and Robert S. Sutor.
Just turn javascript on. Then those menus will work.
Yes, I know, They _want_ to make them free, but there are still some problems in the license:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/11/threads.html
According to people in debian-legal -mailinglist that latest license is not yet free enough. Also, IIRC those fonts can not be included to TeX Live, because license is not yet free enough. Problem is this: Not every kind of modification is allowed. You can remove or add glyphs and modify them, but there are also other things that can be done to fonts, for example modifying kerning.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2007/11/threads.html
But nowadays it does not work like that in practice. Many of those LaTeX-packages have some fonts that do not sit well with some other fonts that may be in same LaTeX-document. One reason for creating STIX Fonts is to rectif that situation.
On the other hand, those default fonts of TeX (Computer Modern) are not very suitable for reading from screen. STIX Fonts have Times-like appearance.
Have you ever tried to read those default fonts of TeX (Computer Modern) from the screen? Trust me: It is just raping your eyes. But of course, they want to make those STIX Fonts fonts free (as in free speech). Those fonts of Mathematica are not free in that sense.
It is Unicode-font. Therefore your problem _may_ exist only with those characters that are mapped to Private Use Area. It seems those fonts have some characters that are not yet in Unicode.
STIX Fonts have both text fonts and math fonts. Therefore you do not need to care, how they look like with other serif fonts used for body, because STIX Fonts can handle that body text, too. On the other hand, STIX Fonts are made to look like Times. Therefore, any sans serif and monospace font that looks good with Times should look good with STIX Fonts.
Read that fscking website, you idiot! Those fonts are primarily meant for TeX-based applications, for example LaTeX. Yes, LaTeX has umpteen gazillion packages for writing all those exotic mathematical operators, but STIX Fonts provides them totally consistent outlook.
Stupid. Those fonts are primarily meant for TeX-based applications, for example LaTeX. rarely used characters are written with commands that start with backslash, for example: \ldots .
Here in Finland Hyundai sells are car model called Sonata. AFAIK it is sold under model name Sonta in the rest of the world. In Finnish language "sonta" means "muck" or "dung".
Hey it would be nice, if buggy software like sendmail and tcsh were burned on a stake! :-P And that leaked copy of Windows sourcecode could be burned like that, too.
I use hnb. Actually it is so called "outline processor", but it has TODO-functionality, too. It is included in Debian GNU/Linux.
Let's see, what FSF says about it:
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/license-list.html
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/license-list.html#
Yes. It can be used as free documentation licence. Debian uses it as licence for their WWW-site:
http://www.debian.org/license
I use this kind of licencing for my non-software works:
My poetry is released under Design Science Licence. Stylesheets of my WWW-pages and certain WWW-pages are dual-licenced: You can use GNU FDL or DSL.
What you think about licences of Creative Commons? Are they really free licences for software, documentation and art?
It seems, that at least NoDerivs- and NonCommercial-licenses are non-free. After that only these licences are left:
There exist many musicians, that think about music in more or less same way as Free Software Foundation thinks about software: It must be free as a bird. Some of them are against a notion of "copyright" and "intellectual property".
. ht mlt mlo pyin g_primer.htmlt wisted_helices. html
t ion.org/copyleft/copyrigh.html
u sic.psp
So, get some free music. It will fill at least few gigabytes. Some of that music has such licence, that forbids selling that music, but for your purpose even that kind of music is good.
Here are my URLs:
http://www.ram.org/ramblings/philosophy/fmp/fma
http://www.ram.org/ramblings/philosophy/fmp.h
http://www.ram.org/ramblings/philosophy/fmp/c
http://www.twisted-helices.com/th/
http://www.negativland.com/
http://logosfoundation.org/
http://logosfounda
http://www.janisian.com/
http://kotisivu.mtv3.fi/hipit/
http://www.vorbis.com/
http://www.vorbis.com/m
http://www.vorbis.com/musicsites.psp
http://www.creativecommons.org/