6 ms·
Their code README says > PreTeXt is guided by the following principles: > 1. PreTeXt is a markup language that captures the structure of textbooks and researc
by jxy 3y ago
Their code README says
> PreTeXt is guided by the following principles:
> 1. PreTeXt is a markup language that captures the structure of textbooks and research papers.
> 2. PreTeXt is human-readable and human-writable.
When did XML become human readable and writable?
- zetalyrae 3y agoXML is a great choice for this because it's a markup language: it's designed for adding structure and formatting information to documents in a way that's generic and extensible. Something like Markdown is too spartan for all the kinds of things you need to make a technical document.
- MattPalmer1086 3y agoXML may be a good choice to markup the structure and formatting of a technical document. That doesn't make it a good human readable and writable format.
- macintux 3y agoNotice that the description didn’t say it was a good format in that regard.
- MattPalmer1086 3y agoAha, very true! It is human readable and writeable after all, just not very pleasant.
- joshmarinacci 3y agoThe ideal interface would be a WYSIWYM (what you see is what you mean) word processor like app that let you edit the markup visually, but using a semantic representation rather than strict WYSIWYG. Thus you can write without having to know too much of the syntax, but still be producing strict markup. I recall such editors existing about 20 years ago. I guess the market for XML tool died.
- chrisweekly 3y agoYou just described Obsidian. Its UX atop .md files is simply amazing.
- d4mi3n 3y agoLogseq is another contender in this vertical: https://logseq.com/ https://logseq.com/
- teleforce 3y agoFor maths and scientific publications with WYSIWYG approach check TeXmacs: https://www.texmacs.org/tmweb/home/welcome.en.html https://www.texmacs.org/tmweb/home/welcome.en.html Please note that despite the name it has nothing to do with TeX or Emacs.
- j45 3y agoNo reason tooling can’t help with the reading and writing. The computer is supposed to read xml, not people. XML isn’t my first choice most days but there exist cases where it still readily flexes past other option no matter how popular.
- MilStdJunkie 3y agoYeah, Markdown's not really a print document format. But LMLs (lightweight markup) don't begin and end with Markdown. Asciidoc, on the other hand . . I've written aircrew flight checklists, component maintenance manuals, typescript developer documentation, illustrated parts catalogues, maintenance handbooks, operation guides, and a good-old-fashioned novelette in Asciidoc. Last few years with VSC. It's fast as hell. I got Asciidoc include for re-use, I got Asciidoc conditionals, VSC snippets, I got a billion other toys like textql, diagrams, wireviz. And yeah yeah yeah, I know, it's cheating: Asciidoc is DocBook, DocBook is XML. Except Asciidoc's not XML. Asciidoc renders in Chrome/Firefox/Edge extensions, Ruby, JS, Python, and it exports to DocBook, LaTeX, PDF, HTML5, ePub, MOBI, MSO via DocToolChain or Pckr and, well, hell, bring in Pandoc if you want something else. When it comes to the Asciidoc tools, I can go from bare metal to full-up publishing environment in ten minutes. And how do I render DocBook again? Oh, the XML pipelines. Those pipelines. Schemas breaking XML spec[1], "XML-aware" diff/merge, whitespace[2], sneaky goddamn proprietary entities[3], namespaces, 1NF, computability[4], charset, semantic-less, hierarchy fetishism, etc etc etc blabbity blabbity blah. I just realized this post sounds really frickin' angry, and I want to take a line here to say that I love all ya'll, but XML publishing has left some scars, and I'm sorry about that. [1] "Leading whitespace in attributes? CHARMING" [2] No such thing as "officially normalized" when it comes to XML whitespace, which means no lines, no tabs, no spaces. [3] Goddamn REVBARS [4] Ah, infinite arbitrary nesting, what a perfect fit for natural language
- bobbylarrybobby 3y ago+1 asciidoc is where it's at. Given its strengths and similarity to markdown, I wonder why it hasn't taken off to the same extent.
- mdaniel 3y agothe most famous example I know of: https://docs.atlas.oreilly.com/writing_in_asciidoc.html https://docs.atlas.oreilly.com/writing_in_asciidoc.html
- CJefferson 3y agoHonestly, the first guide that comes up when you Google, asciidoctor, is bad. I just checked if it had improved and it starts talking about "If you want to enable ad-hoc quotes substitution, then assign the macros value to subs and use the inline pass macro.", without defining assigning, and before I've been told how to put in a header. I got annoyed around there and went back to markdown.
- eviks 3y agoPoor design is also design And markdown isn't the only alternative to the ugliness of XML
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- unmole 3y ago> When did XML become human readable and writable? 1996
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- tannhaeuser 3y ago> When did XML become human readable and writable? Actually XML was designed as delivery not authoring language by giving up SHORTREF (= custom lightweight markup), tag inference, and other short form syntax XML inherited from SGML as its superset. There's even an attempt to bring back lightweight markup into XML ("Invisible Markup") though I personally can't see why they don't just use SGML for this which is an international (ISO) standard since 1986. 1986 or earlier is also about the point in time since when nerds invent their own plain text syntax and processing pipelines - not out of necessity mind you but clearly out of procrastination and fun when SGML (and TeX/LaTeX and run-off) has existed since.