3 ms·

So I guess I can expect to see more low quality mathematical typesetting. The technology is great, but I don't see how it will help with high quality typesettin

So I guess I can expect to see more low quality mathematical typesetting. The technology is great, but I don't see how it will help with high quality typesetting. I can type an equation into LaTeX more quickly that I can photograph it and then go in and manually correct all the spacing issues. And there are spacing issues. The examples PDF has things that just look horrible. No small spacing or negative spacing to space out things like matrices and integrals etc. If I'm going to manually tweak it anyway I might as well do it manually from the start. Typing it up is something that gets quicker with practice like everything else. But what I can actually see happening is people not tweaking the output manually. Either train yourself to use TeX properly, or let someone do it for you.

Retr0spectrum 9y ago
You may be correct, but your comment comes off sounding a bit elitist. Typesetting does not always need to be absolutely perfect, sometimes it just needs to work. For someone who isn't 100% fluent in TeX, making small edits is much easier than having to look up all the syntax and symbol names required.
- cup-of-tea 9y ago
  It's not elitist at all. Anyone can learn TeX.
astro_robot 9y ago
Do you have a guide that you can point to for the correct typesetting in LaTeX?
- cup-of-tea 9y ago
  The best treatment is in the original manual for TeX: The TeXBook by Donald Knuth.
nicodjimenez 9y ago
thanks for your comments, can you share what you want your Latex to look like? how do you want to space out matrices and integrals? we're working on the Latex formatting so we can improve this
- cup-of-tea 9y ago
  I would have put a small space (\,) between the upright "det" and the matrix. An integral sign is usually followed by a negative small space (\!) and the "dx" is separated by a small space (\,). Trouble is I'm not sure if these are absolute rules. I'm sure you can find pathological cases where the spacing will be wrong. Maybe the best thing would be to allow the user to modify the spacing easily after the automatic version is made. I trust you guys have read the TeXBook? Knuth dedicates two chapters to subtleties of mathematical typesetting.
glibgil 9y ago
> Either train yourself to use TeX properly, or let someone do it for you I will let you do it for me. I usually work late at night just before the deadline. What’s your phone number?
- cup-of-tea 9y ago
  Is that a serious offer? I charge 50GBP per hour. Still interested?
  - Retr0spectrum 9y ago
    If you can match $0.005 per request, I'll hire you.
    - saganus 9y ago
      I think the point is that for 50 GBP you will get a much higher quality typesetting than spending 1 GBP on the API. As.usual, it depends on the use case. If you are producing a textbook or something that requires high quality typesetting, you will probably pay for it. If not, you can use a tool like this one but you will have to accept certain margin of error.
esquivalience 9y ago
"Either train yourself to use TeX properly, or let someone do it for you." The same complaint could be raised about using a biro (vs calligraphy), using a printing press (vs handwriting) or using a wysiwyg editor (vs the old word processing paradigm). In my view, this sort of accessibility is a great advance.
- cup-of-tea 9y ago
  I disagree. Technology should either make things easier or better. Making things easier but worse is not progress. Your analogies are incorrect. Calligraphy is not handwriting. It's an art form and very slow to execute. The printing press isn't just an "easier handwriting". It's actually harder to use. But it's better. It's closer to calligraphy than handwriting, in fact. I'm not sure what your argument about WYSIWYG text editors is. In my experience they produce absolutely horrible results because, ironically, they require the user to know more about typesetting than TeX does if high quality output is desired.

Retr0spectrum 9y ago

You may be correct, but your comment comes off sounding a bit elitist. Typesetting does not always need to be absolutely perfect, sometimes it just needs to work. For someone who isn't 100% fluent in TeX, making small edits is much easier than having to look up all the syntax and symbol names required.

cup-of-tea 9y ago
It's not elitist at all. Anyone can learn TeX.

astro_robot 9y ago

Do you have a guide that you can point to for the correct typesetting in LaTeX?

cup-of-tea 9y ago
The best treatment is in the original manual for TeX: The TeXBook by Donald Knuth.

nicodjimenez 9y ago

thanks for your comments, can you share what you want your Latex to look like? how do you want to space out matrices and integrals? we're working on the Latex formatting so we can improve this

cup-of-tea 9y ago
I would have put a small space (\,) between the upright "det" and the matrix. An integral sign is usually followed by a negative small space (\!) and the "dx" is separated by a small space (\,). Trouble is I'm not sure if these are absolute rules. I'm sure you can find pathological cases where the spacing will be wrong. Maybe the best thing would be to allow the user to modify the spacing easily after the automatic version is made. I trust you guys have read the TeXBook? Knuth dedicates two chapters to subtleties of mathematical typesetting.

glibgil 9y ago

> Either train yourself to use TeX properly, or let someone do it for you I will let you do it for me. I usually work late at night just before the deadline. What’s your phone number?

cup-of-tea 9y ago
Is that a serious offer? I charge 50GBP per hour. Still interested?
- Retr0spectrum 9y ago
  If you can match $0.005 per request, I'll hire you.
  - saganus 9y ago
    I think the point is that for 50 GBP you will get a much higher quality typesetting than spending 1 GBP on the API. As.usual, it depends on the use case. If you are producing a textbook or something that requires high quality typesetting, you will probably pay for it. If not, you can use a tool like this one but you will have to accept certain margin of error.

esquivalience 9y ago

"Either train yourself to use TeX properly, or let someone do it for you." The same complaint could be raised about using a biro (vs calligraphy), using a printing press (vs handwriting) or using a wysiwyg editor (vs the old word processing paradigm). In my view, this sort of accessibility is a great advance.

cup-of-tea 9y ago
I disagree. Technology should either make things easier or better. Making things easier but worse is not progress. Your analogies are incorrect. Calligraphy is not handwriting. It's an art form and very slow to execute. The printing press isn't just an "easier handwriting". It's actually harder to use. But it's better. It's closer to calligraphy than handwriting, in fact. I'm not sure what your argument about WYSIWYG text editors is. In my experience they produce absolutely horrible results because, ironically, they require the user to know more about typesetting than TeX does if high quality output is desired.