3 ms·
Lol a simpler latex is so far down my list of what needs to be fixed in science it’s comical as a suggestion. Here are three options for you: 1. Use latex as i
by ramraj07 5y ago
Lol a simpler latex is so far down my list of what needs to be fixed in science it’s comical as a suggestion.
Here are three options for you:
1. Use latex as is, if this is your bread and butter the initial setup and learning curve is a few weeks.
2. Use overleaf. And please don’t start on “I’ll never submit my data to a cloud” no billionaire is going to not take your data.
3. Use word and let your assistant digitize your diagrams.
Point is the tool to make figures is not what’s slowing down good science. It’s the heads that do it that are a problem
- mhh__ 5y agoI think it does slow down progress enough to be worth considering because it's clunky but more importantly because it's ancient so there is almost no ability to extract metadata or properly target anything other than print as a first class target. In teaching for example I think a book of basically just symbols is dated, we should be trying richer ways to display textbooks (e.g. beyond mere hypertext), using information either annotated or extracted from the source. This isn't about figures but rather making it more productive to use in general, and making its use more semantically analysable, and more deterministic: If you include data in a paper is it actually up to date? Does that expression actually solve the equation etc. These are all things you could check automatically. There are obviously bigger problems in science but what are you gonna do about them? It's nearly all political either in the department's or in government, whereas a new LaTeX is a relatively direct thing that can be done with a small team and a lot of money.