On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 09:58:42AM -0500, Michael A. Miller wrote:
> > "Sridhar" == Sridhar M A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > Personally the best thing for writing LaTeX docs is
> > vim/emacs :-)
>
> Emacs + auctex is good too...
>
If you are not averse to it
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 09:00:22AM +0530, Sridhar M.A. wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 01:32:43AM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 10:33:31PM +0200, JG wrote:
>> >
>> > So you could try Lyx (available in woody/contrib, or
>> > testing/unstable/main), which "is an al
> "Sridhar" == Sridhar M A <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Personally the best thing for writing LaTeX docs is
> vim/emacs :-)
Emacs + auctex is good too...
Mike
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Thu, 09 Oct 2003 10:39, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 21:35:12 +0100, Tom Badran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> penned:
> >> I also have heard that OO.org is working on Reveal Codes for their
> >> next release -- which, if true, has me drooling. That's the biggest
> >> thing I miss abo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 09:35:12PM +0100, Tom Badran wrote:
> LyX is very good, and the QT interface for it is very nice.
It would be nice if KOffice did TeX. You'd think it would be the
obvious format choice. KOffice is lighter weight, faster, and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 07:28:02PM +, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> I believe there are WYSIWYG editors for laTeX (or however you capitalize
> it.) I don't recall their names offhand, though.
LaTeX, TeTeX, CrApTeX...they're all StUdLyCaPeD.
- --
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 12:08:12PM -0700, Stephen A. Witt wrote:
> LaTeX would
> probably only work for you if you had some guru type person who set up
> templates that the other people could use so they didn't have to become
> too knowledgeable about
On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 01:32:43AM +0100, Pigeon wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 10:33:31PM +0200, JG wrote:
> >
> > So you could try Lyx (available in woody/contrib, or
> > testing/unstable/main), which "is an almost WYSIWYG-frontend for LaTeX
> > that runs under the X Window Syst
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 11:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I work with a very small non-profit and over the years they have been
> keeping documents in various formats (most often MS Word or
> WordPerfect). From these documents they generate printed booklets (so
> postscript output good), and the doc
On Wed, 2003-10-08 at 14:37, Stephen Patterson wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 21:20:16 +0200, Stephen A. Witt wrote:
> > Another option might be OpenOffice. Essentially its Word without the
> > proprietary-ness of Word.
>
> And these days, it even has a 'direct to pdf' exporter.
All of the modules
On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 10:33:31PM +0200, JG wrote:
>
> So you could try Lyx (available in woody/contrib, or
> testing/unstable/main), which "is an almost WYSIWYG-frontend for LaTeX
> that runs under the X Window System".
Inspired by your post, I downloaded and installed
lyx_1.1.6fix4-2_i386.deb
I highly reccomend Lyx. It is a very easy to learn, intuitive,
powerful editor that generates LaTeX output. It can also export to
HTML via latex2html, for which it has built in support. I've also
seen it say something about text output, but I can't vouch for that
since I haven't used it. An
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 21:35:12 +0100, Tom Badran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
penned:
>
>> I also have heard that OO.org is working on Reveal Codes for their
>> next release -- which, if true, has me drooling. That's the biggest
>> thing I miss about WordPerfect.
>
> No idea what these are so cant comment ;
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 20:28, Monique Y. Herman wrote:
> I believe there are WYSIWYG editors for laTeX (or however you capitalize
> it.) I don't recall their names offhand, though.
LyX is very good, and the QT interface for it is very nice. Ive just done a
full 30 page report with it and w
On Wednesday 08 October 2003 18:14, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I work with a very small non-profit and over the years they have been
> keeping documents in various formats (most often MS Word or
> WordPerfect). From these documents they generate printed booklets
> (so postscript output good), and
On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 21:20:16 +0200, Stephen A. Witt wrote:
> Another option might be OpenOffice. Essentially its Word without the
> proprietary-ness of Word.
And these days, it even has a 'direct to pdf' exporter.
--
Stephen Patterson http://patter.mine.nu/
[EMAIL PROTECTED] remove SPAM to repl
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 12:08:12 -0700 (PDT), Stephen A. Witt
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> penned:
>
> I don't have any experience with DocBook or XSLT, but I do nearly
> everything in LaTeX and I love it. From LaTex source you can pretty
> much automatically generate html and pdf as well as postscript. I do
>
I suggest OpenOffice:
+ available for Linux and Windows platforms
+ easy to learn, many things are similar to Word (but some advanced
features are IMHO better than Word's)
+ its own format is XML based, can also read and write Word, RTF and
other formats
+ new version can generate PDF directly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> I work with a very small non-profit and over the years they have
> been keeping documents in various formats I'd like to move to
> text-based documents so we are not dependent on a specific product
> (like Word). So I'm looking for suggestions.
Aah, the document
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I work with a very small non-profit and over the years they have been
> keeping documents in various formats (most often MS Word or
> WordPerfect). From these documents they generate printed booklets (so
> postscript output good), and the documents ar
20 matches
Mail list logo
