4 ms·

This page is a great example of why we need to finally stop using PDFs for publishing. It reflows perfectly on any screen. Searching and copying work well. I c

This page is a great example of why we need to finally stop using PDFs for publishing. It reflows perfectly on any screen. Searching and copying work well. I can control the font size or use a reader mode. It's already possible to publish similar documents as a single HTML file with embedded images. Maybe add a few more CSS rules for printing and a checksum system against manipulation. But instead, we're dealing with Latex - a language that overcomplicates the most basic features such as fonts, tables and special characters.

bradrn 6y ago
> But instead, we're dealing with Latex - a language that overcomplicates the most basic features such as fonts, tables and special characters. I can’t really argue with the rest of your post, but in my experience this is incorrect. Fonts and special characters are both trivial if you use XeTeX, and tables, though slightly clumsy, are still pretty easy. As an example, see the documentation I wrote for https://github.com/bradrn/Conkey https://github.com/bradrn/Conkey, which makes extremely heavy use of all three features. (As documentation for a keyboard layout, it uses characters from pretty much every corner of Unicode, and accompanying tables of many shapes and sizes to show how to type these characters; I needed to use Gentium in order to render all these characters, with Times New Roman as a fallback. I found that LaTeX could ably handle all of these complecations.)
- SebastianKra 6y ago
  Admittedly, I should have picked better examples. XeTeX helps, but in my last team, I was stuck with Latex and came across this comical discussion on how to typeset a tilde in the default font [1]. For tables there are many many different implementations that all work in only some use cases [2]. A few years ago, I got stuck trying to find a multicolumn table that can reflow onto new pages [3]. Add to that the clunky syntax, the cryptic error messages and the poor defaults, and you can probably see why I dislike it so much. [1]: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/312/correctly-typesetting-a-tilde https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/312/correctly-typese... [2]: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/12672/which-tabular-packages-do-which-tasks-and-which-packages-conflict#12673 https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/12672/which-tabular-... [3]: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/125116/longtabu-with-multicols#125214 https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/125116/longtabu-with...
  - bradrn 6y ago
    > XeTeX helps, but in my last team, I was stuck with Latex Yep, I agree that font-related things are painful if you can only use LaTeX. > For tables there are many many different implementations that all work in only some use cases [2]. A few years ago, I got stuck trying to find a multicolumn table that can reflow onto new pages [3]. If you need complicated reflowing tables, then yes, LaTeX may not be the best option. But most of the time, you don’t need that complexity: I find that just `booktabs` is sufficient for most of my use-cases, along with `array`, `multirow`, `tabularx` and `siunitx` when needed. > Add to that the clunky syntax This is a criticism I can agree with, but I find that a good editor compensates for it. (I use AUCTeX[0]; I find the combination of LaTeX+AUCTeX+Emacs+Evil gives a far better experience than, say, Microsoft Word.) > the cryptic error messages Valid point. However, as with all error messages, I find that they get easier to interpret with experience — I don’t really have any problems with them now. (Also, most compilers tend to give somewhat cryptic errors, so LaTeX is average rather than being especially bad.) > the poor defaults I’m not sure what you mean by this; could you please elaborate? [0] https://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/ https://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/

bradrn 6y ago

> But instead, we're dealing with Latex - a language that overcomplicates the most basic features such as fonts, tables and special characters. I can’t really argue with the rest of your post, but in my experience this is incorrect. Fonts and special characters are both trivial if you use XeTeX, and tables, though slightly clumsy, are still pretty easy. As an example, see the documentation I wrote for https://github.com/bradrn/Conkey https://github.com/bradrn/Conkey, which makes extremely heavy use of all three features. (As documentation for a keyboard layout, it uses characters from pretty much every corner of Unicode, and accompanying tables of many shapes and sizes to show how to type these characters; I needed to use Gentium in order to render all these characters, with Times New Roman as a fallback. I found that LaTeX could ably handle all of these complecations.)

SebastianKra 6y ago
Admittedly, I should have picked better examples. XeTeX helps, but in my last team, I was stuck with Latex and came across this comical discussion on how to typeset a tilde in the default font [1]. For tables there are many many different implementations that all work in only some use cases [2]. A few years ago, I got stuck trying to find a multicolumn table that can reflow onto new pages [3]. Add to that the clunky syntax, the cryptic error messages and the poor defaults, and you can probably see why I dislike it so much. [1]: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/312/correctly-typesetting-a-tilde https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/312/correctly-typese... [2]: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/12672/which-tabular-packages-do-which-tasks-and-which-packages-conflict#12673 https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/12672/which-tabular-... [3]: https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/125116/longtabu-with-multicols#125214 https://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/125116/longtabu-with...
- bradrn 6y ago
  > XeTeX helps, but in my last team, I was stuck with Latex Yep, I agree that font-related things are painful if you can only use LaTeX. > For tables there are many many different implementations that all work in only some use cases [2]. A few years ago, I got stuck trying to find a multicolumn table that can reflow onto new pages [3]. If you need complicated reflowing tables, then yes, LaTeX may not be the best option. But most of the time, you don’t need that complexity: I find that just `booktabs` is sufficient for most of my use-cases, along with `array`, `multirow`, `tabularx` and `siunitx` when needed. > Add to that the clunky syntax This is a criticism I can agree with, but I find that a good editor compensates for it. (I use AUCTeX[0]; I find the combination of LaTeX+AUCTeX+Emacs+Evil gives a far better experience than, say, Microsoft Word.) > the cryptic error messages Valid point. However, as with all error messages, I find that they get easier to interpret with experience — I don’t really have any problems with them now. (Also, most compilers tend to give somewhat cryptic errors, so LaTeX is average rather than being especially bad.) > the poor defaults I’m not sure what you mean by this; could you please elaborate? [0] https://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/ https://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/