Steve Lamb:
>
> To be fair I am operating out a large measure of ignorance.
:)
> One of my
> main concerns is that the typesetting languages are languages. I'm sure
> they're robust but I have always seen their use tied to another editor. Since
> an outside editor is required it is my impression that there is no WYSIWYG, no
> way to get a basic view of how it might look printed outside of actually doing
> whatever magic it is to send it off to a printer. Which I don't have.
Hm? Usually, you have one editor (Notepad-like or something more
advanced) for your Latex code and some viewer application where you can
see your compiled document (PDF, DVI). However, the more you get used
to it, the less you need to know how exactly some specific markup looks
like. You can always adjust the details at a later time without
touching the actual contents of your document.
I know that there is a special Latex-mode for Emacs which displays some
kind of inline-preview directly in your editor. I like vim better,
though, so I cannot tell much about it.
> Also the end result of my labor will be to send this out to be published.
> I have seen many publishers take submissions in Word, plain text or printed
> out. I've yet to see one accept LaTeX. So without a printer I am stuck with
> transforming what I want into an acceptable format and plain text won't so. I
> am using some formatting. Nothing fancy, noting that will cause formatting
> inconsistencies. But just enough that plain text is unacceptable.
Sounds like a job for reStructured Text to me, but that's unacceptable
as well, probably. ;-)
J.
--
It is not in my power to change anything.
[Agree] [Disagree]
<http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature